By An impeachment motion seeking the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar has been rejected by both the Lok Sabha Speaker and the Rajya Sabha Chairman, effectively bringing the Opposition’s attempt to initiate proceedings against the top election official to a halt. The decision follows a detailed review of the notice submitted by Opposition MPs, who had accused the Chief Election Commissioner of misconduct and partisan functioning.
The motion, submitted in March and signed by 63 Rajya Sabha members, invoked constitutional provisions related to the removal of the Chief Election Commissioner and cited multiple legal grounds to demand an inquiry. However, after examining the notice and the accompanying material, both presiding officers concluded that the motion did not meet the threshold required to initiate impeachment proceedings, closing the matter at the preliminary stage.
According to parliamentary sources, the Rajya Sabha Chairman reviewed the notice under provisions of the Judges (Inquiry) Act and relevant constitutional articles before deciding not to admit it. A similar decision was taken by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla, who exercised his authority under the same legal framework to reject the motion. With both Houses refusing to admit the notice, there will be no further inquiry or committee formation on the issue unless a fresh motion is moved with new evidence.
The Opposition had listed seven charges against Gyanesh Kumar, including allegations of partial and discriminatory conduct, misuse of office, and obstruction of investigations related to electoral irregularities. One of the major concerns raised was the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, which Opposition parties claimed led to large-scale voter disenfranchisement and raised questions about the neutrality of the Election Commission’s functioning.
Opposition leaders also alleged that certain decisions taken during the electoral roll revision process appeared to favour the ruling party at the Centre. They cited court observations and administrative decisions as part of their argument, claiming that the situation warranted an independent inquiry into the Chief Election Commissioner’s conduct. However, the presiding officers found insufficient grounds to proceed with the motion at this stage.
The rejection underscores the high constitutional threshold required for initiating impeachment proceedings against a Chief Election Commissioner, a process designed to ensure institutional stability and protect the independence of constitutional authorities. Political observers say the development may intensify the ongoing debate between the government and Opposition over electoral reforms and the functioning of the Election Commission.
While the Opposition is expected to continue raising concerns over electoral processes, the immediate attempt to remove the Chief Election Commissioner has come to an end, allowing the Election Commission to continue its work without the shadow of impeachment proceedings for now.
