OP Rawat
New Delhi: Changes to the statutory voter registration Form 6 are “absolutely wrong and illegal”, former chief election commissioner O P Rawat said on Wednesday, September 23, while describing revelations of differences within the Election Commission as “very serious” and “unfortunate”.
Reacting to an Indian Express report that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had repeatedly objected to decisions and orders issued without their knowledge, Rawat said such a situation had “perhaps rarely” arisen in the poll body.
Electoral roll software cannot be allowed to override decisions of field officials, he said.
The two commissioners recorded objections at least 14 times over the past 10 months on issues ranging from registration and deletion of voters to changes in Form 6 and centralisation of control over the electoral roll database, according to the report.
“This is an unfortunate situation. Such a thing has perhaps rarely happened in the Election Commission. I have also been there, but I saw that decisions were always taken unanimously,” Rawat, who served as chief election commissioner from January to December 2018, told PTI Videos.
“Through SIR (Special Intensive Revision), it has created a kind of Frankenstein which has created fear in the minds of voters everywhere. This is not good. It is very unfortunate for our democracy,” he said.
The former CEC said the reported objections over Form 6 were particularly serious since the two commissioners had maintained that the statutory form could not be altered without amending the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
According to the report, Joshi recorded in May that Form 6 could not be changed through instructions issued for the SIR and that the “legally sustainable” course would be to send the proposal to the government for amending the rules. Sandhu concurred with him.
However, a declaration linking new voter applications to the SIR was subsequently introduced in the online Form 6. In August, Sandhu recorded that the change was “unauthorised and illegal” and should be removed immediately, the report said.
“What the election commissioners have said, that Form 6 was amended wrongly, that there is no provision for it in law, that their inputs were not taken and no meeting was held, is a very serious allegation. The way Form 6 has been amended is wrong. It is absolutely wrong and illegal,” Rawat said.
He also strongly criticised the reported centralisation of control over the electoral roll database. The concerns escalated to the point where the two commissioners separately approached Cabinet Secretary T V Somanathan over changes in the supervision of the EC’s information technology system, according to the report.
“If software has been designed in such a way that even if field functionaries are satisfied that a change should be made, they are helpless because the software does not permit it, then this is absolutely illegal and wrong,” Rawat said.
“No one has the right to monopolise all powers and say that we will make the software and whatever the software says will have to be done. This has never happened and should never happen,” he said.
Rawat said the developments risked further damaging public confidence in the poll body amid questions raised by political parties over the SIR.
“Their trust is completely breaking down in an institution which they have trusted and which has always delivered free, fair and credible elections,” he said.
Rawat said the two commissioners, as members of a constitutional body, also had a responsibility to prevent actions they considered improper.
“The question will also arise as to why they remained silent for 10 months. Why did they not raise it earlier? They too are functionaries of a constitutional institution. It is their responsibility not to allow even one mistake to happen,” Rawat said.
Neither Sandhu nor Joshi has publicly spoken about the reported differences or their objections.
Under Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, the commission’s business is required, as far as possible, to be transacted unanimously, and where members differ, the matter is to be decided according to the majority opinion.
EC sources maintained on Wednesday that all its decisions, including those concerning the SIR, had been unanimous despite differences and had the approval of all three commissioners.
This post was last modified on September 23, 2026 3:57 pm