The Election Commission of India (ECI) on Wednesday rejected a report suggesting internal disagreements among its three members over decisions related to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
ECI sources told Hindustan Times that all decisions taken by the poll panel, including the SIR exercise, were unanimous and had the approval of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
The clarification came after an Indian Express investigation reported that Sandhu and Joshi had formally raised objections at least 14 times over 10 months to decisions and orders they said were issued without their knowledge or approval.
What the Indian Express Report Said
According to the investigation, the objections covered several aspects of electoral-roll management, including changes to Form 6, centralisation of electoral-roll database controls, voter-deletion appeals in West Bengal and difficulties in adding eligible voters to the electoral roll in Goa.
The report said four of the objections were recorded on the same day.
The investigation was based on written objections allegedly recorded by Sandhu and Joshi between November 2025 and August 2026. It reported that the objections were also copied to CEC Gyanesh Kumar.
Dispute Over Form 6 Changes
One of the reported disagreements concerned Form 6, which is used by citizens to apply for registration as voters.
The Indian Express reported that a new declaration linked to the SIR was added to the form. According to the report, applicants were asked whether their name, or that of a parent or grandparent, appeared in an electoral roll from the previous SIR.
The report said Joshi had objected in May, arguing that the statutory Form 6 could not be altered without amending the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. Sandhu subsequently described the change as “unauthorised and illegal” and called for its removal.
Concerns Over Electoral-Roll Database
The investigation also reported concerns raised by the two commissioners over access to the electoral-roll database.
Joshi reportedly flagged what he described as the “gradual centralisation” of the electoral-roll database and sought an audit to ensure that statutory election authorities retained the necessary access.
Sandhu later raised concerns that some state-level election officials did not have complete access to the ERONet system, according to the report. The two commissioners also separately wrote to Cabinet Secretary T V Somanathan over changes concerning the Commission’s IT administration.
Goa and West Bengal Issues
The reported objections also involved electoral-roll processes in West Bengal and Goa.
In Goa, the Indian Express reported that 97 voters were found eligible by Electoral Registration Officers but could not be added to the final electoral roll because the software did not allow officials to record their decisions.
In West Bengal, the report said questions were raised over appeals related to the deletion of voters whose names had been retained following scrutiny.
ECI Maintains Decisions Were Unanimous
Despite the findings reported by the Indian Express, the ECI has maintained that its decisions were taken unanimously.
The Commission’s response to Hindustan Times said: “All decisions of the Election Commission of India, including SIR, have been unanimous and with the approval of both the Election Commissioners and the Chief Election Commissioner.”
The competing accounts put the focus on how decisions and communications within the three-member constitutional body were taken and approved during the SIR exercise.
