The Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) can be removed only in the same manner and on the same grounds as a Supreme Court judge (Article 324(5)). A removal motion needs the signatures of 100 Lok Sabha or 50 Rajya Sabha members, an inquiry committee must find “proved misbehaviour or incapacity”, and each House must pass the motion by a special majority. No CEC has ever been removed this way. The issue is in the news because Opposition parties are preparing a fresh removal notice against CEC Gyanesh Kumar in September 2026.
Syllabus: GS Paper 2 – Constitutional bodies: appointment, powers, functions and responsibilities; Salient features of the Representation of People’s Act
Prelims: High – Article 324, removal procedure, special majority, 2023 Act
Last updated: 25 September 2026
Context
In September 2026, Opposition parties announced a fresh notice in both Houses of Parliament seeking the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The move followed an investigation by The Indian Express reporting that the two other Election Commissioners had raised questions over processes linked to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls on at least 14 occasions over 10 months. The Election Commission of India (ECI) responded that its decisions were unanimous.
This is not the first attempt. In April 2026, Rajya Sabha Chairman C.P. Radhakrishnan and Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla refused to admit an earlier Opposition notice of motion against the CEC. That was the first time notices to remove a CEC had been submitted in both Houses.
Constitutional Position of the Election Commission
Article 324 vests the superintendence, direction and control of elections to Parliament, State Legislatures and the offices of the President and Vice-President in the Election Commission. The Commission consists of the CEC and such number of other Election Commissioners (ECs) as the President may fix. Since 1993 it has been a three-member body.
| Provision | What it says |
|---|---|
| Article 324(1) | Superintendence, direction and control of elections vested in the Election Commission |
| Article 324(2) | ECI consists of the CEC and other ECs, appointed by the President subject to law made by Parliament |
| Article 324(5) | CEC removable only “in like manner and on the like grounds as a Judge of the Supreme Court”; conditions of service cannot be varied to the CEC’s disadvantage after appointment |
| Article 324(5), proviso | Other ECs and Regional Commissioners can be removed only on the recommendation of the CEC |
| CEC and Other ECs Act, 2023 | Governs appointment (selection committee), qualifications, six-year term / age 65, and service conditions |
Grounds for Removal
Through Article 324(5), the CEC’s removal is linked to Article 124(4), which allows removal of a Supreme Court judge only on two grounds:
- Proved misbehaviour – courts have read this to include corrupt practices, abuse of office and conduct incompatible with the office.
- Incapacity – physical or mental inability to discharge the duties of the office.
Political disagreement with the CEC’s decisions is not by itself a ground. The allegation must be investigated and proved before Parliament can vote.
Step-by-Step Removal Procedure
The procedure follows Article 124(4)–(5) and the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
| Stage | What happens |
|---|---|
| 1. Notice of motion | Signed by at least 100 Lok Sabha members or 50 Rajya Sabha members and submitted to the Speaker or Chairman |
| 2. Admission | The Speaker/Chairman may admit or refuse to admit the notice after consulting persons and material as they think fit |
| 3. Inquiry committee | If admitted, a three-member committee is formed: a Supreme Court judge, a High Court Chief Justice and a distinguished jurist |
| 4. Report | If the committee finds the charges not proved, the process ends. If proved, the report goes to the House with the motion |
| 5. Special majority | Each House must pass the motion by a majority of its total membership and two-thirds of members present and voting, in the same session |
| 6. Presidential order | The President then passes the removal order |
CEC vs Other Election Commissioners: The Protection Gap
The Constitution gives the CEC judge-like security of tenure, but the other two Election Commissioners can be removed by the President on the CEC’s recommendation. In T.N. Seshan v. Union of India (1995), the Supreme Court held that the CEC and ECs are equal in decision-making and the Commission decides by majority. The Election Commission has recommended that ECs get the same removal protection as the CEC, but this has not been adopted.
Significance of the Debate
- Institutional independence: A high removal threshold protects the CEC from executive pressure, which is essential for free and fair elections, a part of the basic structure.
- Accountability: Because the threshold is so high, it is almost impossible to remove a CEC, so questions about the Commission’s conduct usually end up in the courts and in public debate instead.
- Internal dissent: Reports that the ECs recorded objections raise the question of how dissent within a multi-member body should be recorded and made public.
- Link to appointments: The removal debate runs in parallel with the constitutional challenge to the 2023 appointment law, now before the Supreme Court.
Concerns and Criticism
- The admission stage gives the presiding officer wide discretion; a notice can be refused without a public inquiry.
- The special majority means removal depends on the ruling coalition’s numbers, so the process can look partisan whichever side uses it.
- ECs lack equal protection, which may make them less willing to dissent.
- There is no transparent mechanism for recording dissent within the ECI, unlike dissenting opinions in courts.
Way Forward
- Extend Article 324(5)-style removal protection to all Election Commissioners, as the ECI and several committees have suggested.
- Record dissent notes in ECI decisions and publish them after a fixed period, which would add transparency without disrupting operations.
- Build on Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India (2023) with a broad-based, independent appointment process, so that trust is built in at the point of appointment and removal is rarely needed.
- Publish detailed SIR methodology and data to address the controversy on the merits.
Conclusion
The high bar for removing a CEC exists to protect the Election Commission from political pressure, not to shield it from scrutiny. Whether or not the new notice is admitted, the episode shows that the Commission’s legitimacy depends on two things together: security of tenure, and visible transparency in how its members decide.
Key Facts for Prelims
- Article 324(5): CEC removable only like a Supreme Court judge; other ECs only on the CEC’s recommendation.
- Grounds: proved misbehaviour or incapacity (Article 124(4)).
- Notice: 100 Lok Sabha MPs or 50 Rajya Sabha MPs; inquiry under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
- Special majority: majority of total membership + two-thirds of members present and voting, in each House.
- ECI became multi-member permanently in 1993; T.N. Seshan v. Union of India (1995) upheld the multi-member Commission.
- CEC and ECs: six-year term or age 65, whichever is earlier (CEC and Other ECs Act, 2023).
- No CEC has ever been removed by Parliament.
Mains Practice Question
Q. “The security of tenure of the Chief Election Commissioner is a safeguard for electoral democracy, but the absence of similar protection for other Election Commissioners weakens the Commission as a collective body.” Critically examine. (15 marks, 250 words)
Approach: Introduce Article 324 and 324(5). Explain the CEC’s removal process and the proviso for ECs. Discuss T.N. Seshan (1995) on equality of members, the 2026 controversy over recorded objections, and the ECI’s own reform proposals. Conclude with equal protection plus transparency in dissent.
FAQs
How can the Chief Election Commissioner be removed?
The CEC can be removed only in the same manner and on the same grounds as a Supreme Court judge (Article 324(5)). A notice signed by 100 Lok Sabha or 50 Rajya Sabha members is needed, an inquiry committee must find proved misbehaviour or incapacity, and both Houses must pass the motion by special majority before the President orders removal.
Who can remove other Election Commissioners?
Other Election Commissioners can be removed by the President, but only on the recommendation of the Chief Election Commissioner, under the proviso to Article 324(5).
Has any Chief Election Commissioner been removed in India?
No. No Chief Election Commissioner has ever been removed by Parliament. In April 2026, the Lok Sabha Speaker and Rajya Sabha Chairman refused to admit a notice of motion to remove CEC Gyanesh Kumar.
What majority is required to remove the CEC?
A special majority in each House: a majority of the total membership of the House and a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting.
Why is the CEC removal issue in the news in 2026?
Opposition parties announced a fresh removal notice against CEC Gyanesh Kumar in September 2026 after a media investigation reported that the two other Election Commissioners had raised questions over the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls at least 14 times in 10 months.
Sources: Business Standard explainer, 25 Sep 2026; All India Radio, April 2026; Constitution of India, Article 324.
Related reading on GSMitra: Supreme Court split verdict on the EC appointment law, SIR phase 3 and shrinking voter rolls, Criminalisation of politics in India.
Revise this topic with a custom test in the GSMitra MCQ Test Builder, or get your Mains answers on it evaluated 1:1 through GSMitra mentorship.