CURRENT AFFAIRS | 7 MAY 2026
CLAT GK + POLITY & CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
The independence of the Election Commission of India (ECI) has always been a cornerstone of Indian democracy. Article 324 of the Constitution vests the superintendence, direction, and control of the entire election process in the ECI — a provision framed to insulate electoral administration from executive pressure. Yet how Election Commissioners are appointed has long been a constitutional grey zone, exploited by successive governments to stack the commission with loyalists.
In 2023, a landmark 5-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Anoop Baranwal v Union of India unanimously held that until Parliament legislates under Article 324(2), the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) must be made by a three-member committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, and the Chief Justice of India. The judgment was hailed as a structural safeguard for democratic integrity. Parliament responded swiftly — but controversially — by enacting the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, which replaced the CJI with a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the PM, giving the government effective control of 2 out of 3 committee votes.
Now, in May 2026, the Supreme Court is hearing whether the Baranwal (2023) ruling created a permanent constitutional minimum that Parliament cannot override, or whether it was always a temporary stopgap pending Parliamentary legislation. This distinction — between “constitutional minimum” and “interim measure” — is the precise fault line on which CLAT passages on ECI independence are structured.
- Art. 324: ECI has superintendence, direction & control of elections to Parliament and State Legislatures
- Art. 324(2): Number of ECs and their appointment are “subject to provisions of any law made by Parliament”
- Art. 324(5): CEC cannot be removed except in like manner as SC judge (address of both Houses); EC removed only on CEC’s recommendation
- Art. 329: Bars courts from questioning elections except by election petition; bars interference with electoral processes
- Anoop Baranwal v Union of India (2023): PM + Leader of Opposition + CJI committee mandated until Parliament acts
- CEC & Other ECs Act, 2023: Parliament replaced CJI with a Cabinet Minister nominated by PM
- TN Seshan v Union of India (1995): SC upheld independent constitutional status of ECI
CLAT Legal Reasoning passages on ECI independence typically present a scenario where Parliament has legislated after a court order, then ask whether the legislation is constitutionally valid. The core test: Was the SC order in Anoop Baranwal a “constitutional minimum” (which Parliament cannot reduce) or a “statutory gap-fill” (which Parliament can replace)? Students must apply the test of reasonable classification under Art. 14 and separation of powers doctrine.
A common trap question: “The CEC is removed by the President on the recommendation of Parliament.” This is WRONG. The CEC is removed by an address of BOTH Houses of Parliament — the President has no discretion here. This mirrors the removal procedure for SC judges under Art. 124(4).
Another trap: “Election Commissioners enjoy the same security of tenure as the CEC.” FALSE — ECs are removed on the CEC’s recommendation (Art. 324(5)), not by Parliamentary address. The asymmetry in protection is deliberate and has been the subject of multiple CLAT passages.
| Governing Article | Article 324 (superintendence) + Art. 324(2) (appointment) |
| Baranwal Committee (2023) | PM + Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha + Chief Justice of India |
| 2023 Act Committee | PM + Leader of Opposition + Cabinet Minister nominated by PM |
| CEC Removal Procedure | Address of both Houses of Parliament (same as SC judge) |
| EC Removal Procedure | Recommendation of Chief Election Commissioner only |
| ECI Composition | 3 members: CEC + 2 ECs (expanded from 1 by 1989 amendment) |
| Current Question Before SC | Was Baranwal ruling permanent constitutional norm or temporary interim measure? |
| TN Seshan Case (1995) | Upheld ECI’s independent constitutional status; powers co-extensive with entire commission |
MNEMONIC: “CEC PILC” — Protection Identical to Lord Chief (Justice)
C = CEC removed like Chief Justice (Parliamentary address)
E = Election Commissioners removed on CEC’s Recommendation
C = Committee: PM + LOP + CJI (Baranwal 2023, replaced by PM + LOP + Cabinet Min by 2023 Act)
Memory hook: “The CEC is the PILLAR of democracy — strong and hard to remove. The EC is a pillar too — but shorter, needing CEC’s support to fall.”
Practice Quiz — 10 CLAT-Style Questions
Click an option to reveal the answer and explanation.
