Free and fair elections are the cornerstone of democracy. The Indian Constitution entrusts the conduct of elections to a single, independent constitutional body: the Election Commission of India. Article 324 vests in the Commission "the superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections to Parliament and to the Legislature of every State and of elections to the offices of President and Vice-President." The 2017 Prelims tested three specific propositions about the Commission's composition, the role of the Home Ministry, and the resolution of party splits and mergers. The Commission has evolved from a single-member body to a three-member body. Its independence is constitutionally protected. Hold the architecture, the case law, and the political evolution.
Article 324 — the constitutional foundation
Article 324(1) provides: "The superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections to Parliament and to the Legislature of every State and of elections to the offices of President and Vice-President held under this Constitution shall be vested in a Commission (referred to in this Constitution as the Election Commission)."
The Commission has plenary authority over:
(i) Preparation of electoral rolls.
(ii) Conduct of elections to the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.
(iii) Conduct of elections to all State Legislative Assemblies and Legislative Councils.
(iv) Election of the President.
(v) Election of the Vice-President.
The phrase "superintendence, direction and control" is wide. The Supreme Court has held that this language is broad enough to include all powers necessary for the smooth and effective conduct of elections — even powers not specifically enumerated.
Article 324(2) — Composition. "The Election Commission shall consist of the Chief Election Commissioner and such number of other Election Commissioners, if any, as the President may from time to time fix and the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners shall, subject to the provisions of any law made in that behalf by Parliament, be made by the President."
Two structural features: (i) The CEC is constitutionally mandated; ECs are optional ("if any"). (ii) The President appoints all members.
Article 324(3) — Chairman. "When any other Election Commissioner is so appointed the Chief Election Commissioner shall act as the Chairman of the Election Commission."
Article 324(4) — Regional Commissioners. The President may appoint Regional Commissioners (in consultation with the Election Commission) to assist the Commission. Regional Commissioners are NOT members of the Commission — they assist it.
Article 324(5) — Conditions of service and tenure.
Proviso 1: The CEC cannot be removed except in like manner and on like grounds as a Supreme Court judge.
Proviso 2: The conditions of service of the CEC cannot be varied to his disadvantage after appointment.
Proviso 3: Other ECs (and Regional Commissioners) can be removed only on the recommendation of the CEC.
The CEC is therefore far more strongly protected than other ECs. The Supreme Court has emphasised this asymmetry in S.S. Dhanoa (1991) and T.N. Seshan (1995).
Composition — single to multi-member
The composition of the Election Commission has evolved significantly.
1950-1989 — Single-member body. The Commission consisted only of the Chief Election Commissioner. This was the framers' choice — they wanted a permanent CEC but not a permanent multi-member body, since they thought elections would happen only every five years.
1989 — First multi-member experiment. The Rajiv Gandhi government, by notification, fixed the number of ECs at two. Two persons were appointed as ECs alongside CEC R.V.S. Peri Sastri. The move was partly to dilute the powers of the CEC.
1990 — Reverted to single-member. The new V.P. Singh government, on 1 January 1990, rescinded the 1989 notifications. The two EC posts were abolished. The Commission was again a single-member body.
S.S. Dhanoa v. Union of India (1991) — the Supreme Court upheld the 1990 notifications. The Court held that under Article 324(2), the President's power to create EC posts is unfettered — and so is the power to abolish them. Mr. Dhanoa, who had been an EC, lost his post when the EC posts were abolished.
1993 — Multi-member body re-established. The Narasimha Rao government, by notification on 1 October 1993, fixed ECs at two and appointed two persons. The same notification effectively reduced the CEC's powers — the CEC was no longer the sole decision-maker but only one of three.
CEC T.N. Seshan challenged the move. He argued that the CEC should retain primacy — being constitutionally protected in a way other ECs are not.
T.N. Seshan v. Union of India (1995) — Supreme Court (5-judge bench) upheld the multi-member structure. The Court held: (i) the CEC has no constitutional primacy in decision-making; (ii) all members of the Commission are equal in functional terms; (iii) decisions are taken by majority. The CEC's constitutional protection (more secure removal procedure) does NOT translate into greater functional authority.
1995 onwards — three-member body permanently. CEC plus two ECs. Decisions by majority vote. The Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners (Conditions of Service) Act 1991 (amended 1993) — six-year tenure or age 65, whichever earlier. Salary equal to a Supreme Court judge.
The 2017 Prelims — three propositions
The 2017 Prelims tested three specific propositions about the Election Commission.
- The Election Commission of India is a five member body.
- Union Ministry of Home Affairs decides the election schedule for the conduct of both general elections and bye-elections.
- Election Commission resolves the disputes relating to splits/mergers of recognized political parties.
The 2017 question is significant. Three traps:
Trap 1 — five-member body. Wrong. The Election Commission has been a three-member body since 1995. Some aspirants confuse it with the size of certain other commissions or assume size has grown. The number 5 is not correct.
Trap 2 — Home Ministry decides schedule. Wrong. The Election Commission has plenary authority over the conduct of elections under Article 324(1). The Home Ministry plays NO role in deciding election schedules. The MHA is responsible for security arrangements during elections (in consultation with the EC), but not for scheduling.
Trap 3 — splits/mergers of parties. Correct. Under the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order 1968, when a recognised political party splits or merges, the Election Commission decides which faction is the "real" party (entitled to retain the symbol and recognition) and which is treated as a new party. The Commission's decisions in Sadiq Ali v. Election Commission (1972 — Congress split), APHLC Shillong v. M.A. Sangma (1977), and many others have been upheld by the Supreme Court.
Powers and functions
The Election Commission's powers under Article 324 are interpreted broadly. Key functions:
1. Electoral rolls. Preparation, revision, and maintenance of electoral rolls for all elections. The EC issues guidelines, supervises State-level officials, and ensures uniformity. The Representation of the People Act 1950 governs the substantive law on rolls.
2. Notification of elections. The EC announces the schedule, including dates of nomination, scrutiny, withdrawal, polling, and counting. The Model Code of Conduct comes into force from the date of announcement.
3. Conduct of elections. Including delimiting constituencies, demarcating polling stations, conducting polls, counting votes, declaring results.
4. Recognition of political parties and reservation of symbols. Under the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order 1968. The EC recognises parties as national or State; allocates reserved symbols; resolves disputes over party splits and mergers (the 2017 PYQ tested this).
5. Disqualification of MPs and MLAs. The EC has a role in disqualification proceedings. Under Article 103 (for MPs) and Article 192 (for MLAs), the President or Governor decides on disqualification but only after obtaining the EC's opinion. The EC's opinion is binding.
6. Election expenditure scrutiny. Candidates must file returns of election expenditure with the EC. Violations can lead to disqualification under the Representation of the People Act 1951.
7. Model Code of Conduct enforcement. A self-regulating code agreed upon by political parties. Not statutory but enforced through political pressure and EC directives. Came into force from the date of EC's election notification.
8. EVM and VVPAT decisions. The EC has authority over voting technology — Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and Voter-Verified Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) — including testing, deployment, and procedures.
The EC's plenary powers were affirmed in Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner (1978). The Supreme Court held that Article 324's "superintendence, direction and control" is wide enough to fill any gap left by election laws. The EC can make regulations to ensure free and fair elections.
Recent reform — appointment process
For decades, the appointment of the CEC and ECs was at the discretion of the executive — formally by the President but in substance by the Prime Minister. There was no statutory or constitutional process specifying how candidates should be selected.
This was challenged in Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India. In March 2023, a 5-judge bench of the Supreme Court held that the appointment of CEC and ECs should be by the President on the recommendation of a committee consisting of:
(i) The Prime Minister;
(ii) The Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha (or leader of the largest opposition party if no formal LoP);
(iii) The Chief Justice of India.
This procedure was to apply until Parliament enacted a law on the subject.
Parliament did so. The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023 was enacted in December 2023. The Act's key provisions:
Selection Committee:
(i) The Prime Minister — Chairperson;
(ii) The Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha;
(iii) A Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister.
The Chief Justice of India is NOT on the Committee. This is a significant departure from the Supreme Court's 2023 prescription.
Search Committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary — prepares a panel of five names for the Selection Committee's consideration.
The 2023 Act has been challenged before the Supreme Court for excluding the CJI. The matter is pending. The current arrangement — Selection Committee with PM, LoP, and a Cabinet Minister — represents a partial democratisation of the appointment process compared to pre-2023, but falls short of the Court's 2023 directive.
Tenure: Six years or age 65, whichever earlier (under the 1991 Act, retained).
Salary: Equivalent to a Supreme Court judge.
Removal: CEC — like a Supreme Court judge (Article 324(5) proviso). Other ECs — only on the CEC's recommendation.
State Election Commission — Article 243K and 243ZA
The Election Commission of India does NOT conduct elections to Panchayats and Municipalities. Those are conducted by separate State Election Commissions, established under Article 243K (for Panchayats) and Article 243ZA (for Municipalities) — added by the 73rd and 74th Amendments of 1992.
Each State has a State Election Commission consisting of a State Election Commissioner appointed by the Governor. The State Election Commissioner has security of tenure equivalent to a High Court judge — cannot be removed except in like manner and on like grounds.
The Election Commission of India and the State Election Commissions are separate. There is no hierarchical relationship between them. The ECI handles Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, State Legislatures, President, and Vice-President. The State Election Commissions handle Panchayats and Municipalities.
This division of labour was deliberate. Local body elections are State subjects (the 73rd and 74th Amendments preserved this) and are handled by State institutions. National and State legislative elections are constitutional matters under Article 324 and are handled by the central body.
What students must hold
Six points carry the weight. One, Article 324 — Election Commission of India. Plenary authority over electoral rolls and conduct of elections to Parliament, State Legislatures, President, and Vice-President. Does NOT conduct local body elections (those go to State Election Commissions under Articles 243K and 243ZA).
Two, composition: CEC + such number of ECs as President may fix. Currently three-member body (CEC + 2 ECs) since 1993. The 2017 Prelims tested this — "five-member body" was wrong.
Three, removal: CEC — like a Supreme Court judge (proviso to Article 324(5)). Other ECs — only on CEC's recommendation. Salary cannot be adversely varied during tenure (CEC). All members have salary equal to SC judge under the 1991 Act.
Four, decision-making: by majority. T.N. Seshan v. Union of India (1995) held that the CEC has no functional primacy — all members equal in decision-making.
Five, powers: electoral rolls; conduct of elections; recognition of political parties and symbol allocation; resolution of party splits and mergers; opinion in disqualification proceedings; election expenditure scrutiny; Model Code of Conduct enforcement; EVM/VVPAT decisions. Mohinder Singh Gill v. CEC (1978) — Article 324 fills any gap in election laws.
Six, the 2017 Prelims tested: NOT 5 members (3); NOT Home Ministry that decides schedule (the EC does); IS the EC that resolves party splits/mergers (under the Election Symbols Order 1968). Recent: Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act 2023 — Selection Committee with PM, LoP, and Cabinet Minister (CJI excluded). For more, see Model Code of Conduct.