PolityGovernance
News 1 of 29

SC Critiques 2023 EC Appointment Act for Replacing CJI with Minister, Cites 'Tyranny of the Elected'

PolityCORE
Target:UPSC GS-IIMPSCSSC GATeachingPrelims HighMains HighStatic GK Link
08 May 2026
~2 min
Source: Indian Express
Key Data:Article 324(2)2023
Bodies:Supreme CourtElection Commission of IndiaParliament
Practice MCQs from today's news ▸
What This Article Covers

1.The Supreme Court, hearing challenges to the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, criticized the long legislative delay as 'tyranny of the elected'.

2.The 2023 law replaced the Chief Justice of India with a Union Cabinet minister in the selection committee, a move petitioners argue restores executive dominance over appointments.

3.The core legal battle revolves around insulating the Election Commission from executive interference to protect democratic integrity, a fundamental principle tested in exams.

The Big Picture
Prelims · HighMains · High

The Supreme Court has sharply criticized Parliament's delay in legislating a process for appointing Election Commissioners, describing it as 'tyranny of the elected'. This stems from a challenge to the 2023 Act which replaced the CJI with a Union Minister in the selection panel, potentially compromising the Commission's independence, a core issue for any polity and governance aspirant.

Exam Lens

Quick Exam Facts From News

Key ArticleArticle 324(2)
Landmark CaseAnoop Baranwal vs Union of India (2023)
2023 ActCEC and ECs (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023
Key Petitioner (2024)Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR)

1-Minute Revision

  • ›Key Article: Article 324(2)
  • ›Landmark Case: Anoop Baranwal vs Union of India (2023)
  • ›Target this Data: The 2023 Act is the 'Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023'.
  • ›Target this Nodal Body: The Supreme Court of India (Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma).
  • ›Target this Legal Point: Article 324(2) of the Constitution and Section 7(1) of the 2023 Act.

Mastered this topic? Test your knowledge with a full MCQ quiz.

Practice exam-style questions, track your score, and strengthen your recall.

Q1Static LinkageEasy

Under which Article of the Constitution is the Election Commission of India established?

Q2Statement-basedHard

Consider the following statements regarding the appointment of Election Commissioners:

1. The Supreme Court's 2023 ruling in *Anoop Baranwal vs Union of India* prescribed a selection committee consisting of the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition, and the Chief Justice of India.

2. The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, replaced the Union Cabinet Minister in the selection committee with the Chief Justice of India.

3. Article 324(2) of the Constitution states that the appointment of Election Commissioners is subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q3Data-centricMedium

As per the article, which non-governmental organization (NGO) challenged the 2023 Act on Election Commission appointments in 2024?

Q4Application/ImpactMedium

What was the primary reason cited in the article for challenging the 2023 Act on Election Commission appointments?

All 15 MCQs ▸
You finished this topic
Explore Related Topics
Related Current Affairs
Polity Current Affairs

SC Split Verdict on CEC/EC Appointment Act, 2023; Matter Referred to CJI for Constitution Bench

A two-judge Supreme Court bench has split on whether to refer the challenge to the CEC and ECs (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023 to a five-judge Constitution Bench. With Justice Dipankar Datta disagreeing with Justice S C Sharma, the case now goes to the CJI for constituting a larger bench. For aspirants, this is a direct link to Article 324, the Anoop Baranwal verdict, and the independence of the Election Commission.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Refers Challenge to 2023 EC Appointment Law to 5-Judge Constitution Bench

The Supreme Court has referred the challenge to the 2023 law on appointment of Election Commissioners to a 5-judge Constitution Bench after a split verdict. The law replaced the Chief Justice of India with a Union Cabinet Minister in the selection committee, raising concerns about executive dominance and independence of the Election Commission. This case is crucial for exam aspirants as it involves constitutional principles of independence of constitutional bodies and separation of powers.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Refers 2023 CEC Appointment Law to CJI for Constitution Bench; Excludes CJI from Selection Panel

The Supreme Court has referred the challenge to the 2023 law on appointment of CEC and ECs to the CJI for consideration of a Constitution Bench. The law replaced the CJI with a Cabinet minister in the selection panel, raising concerns about executive influence. A split verdict between two judges led to the referral.

Polity Current Affairs

Anoop Baranwal Principle vs Prescription: SC Split on Referral of CEC Appointment Act Challenge

The Supreme Court's two-judge bench split on whether to refer the challenge to the 2023 CEC Appointment Act to a Constitution Bench. Justice Datta held that the Anoop Baranwal principle (appointments free from exclusive executive control) is binding, while the specific committee composition (including CJI) was advisory; thus the challenge raises only application, not interpretation. Justice Sharma disagreed, citing need for independent examination. This debate is crucial for understanding the constitutional independence of the Election Commission.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Questions Fairness of PM-Led Panel for CEC Appointment Under 2023 Act

The Supreme Court has questioned whether the selection of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners by a PM-led committee (with a Union Minister and LoP) demonstrates 'fairness'. The Centre defended the process citing constitutional trust, but the court hinted at the need for a more independent mechanism. This is crucial for understanding the debate on institutional independence and the Election Commission's autonomy.

Polity Current Affairs

Govt to SC: Only Parliament Can Extend Creamy Layer to SC/ST; Cites Article 341, E V Chinnaiah Case

The government has told the Supreme Court that extending the creamy layer principle to SC/ST is a policy decision for Parliament alone. This reaffirms that reservation for SC/ST is based on historical social criteria, not just economic status, and the creamy layer concept currently applies only to OBCs.

Polity Current Affairs

Centre Tells SC Creamy Layer Cannot Apply to SC/ST Quotas, Cites Historical Disadvantage

The Centre has opposed extending the creamy layer principle to SC/ST reservations, arguing that historical discrimination based on untouchability cannot be equated with economic backwardness. The affidavit also asserts that any change in reservation policy is Parliament's domain, not the courts. This is critical for understanding the distinction between SC/ST and OBC reservation criteria.

Polity Current Affairs

ECI SIR Process: 93% Inclusion Rate in WB Appeals; SC Hearing on Voter Deletions in Delhi & WB

The ECI's SIR process has led to massive disenfranchisement in West Bengal and Delhi. With only 3.2% of appeals disposed and 93% of those restored, the process is deeply flawed. The Supreme Court is hearing petitions; this has major implications for electoral integrity and universal adult franchise.