Gyanesh Kumar: The proposal to remove the Chief Election Commissioner, Gyanesh Kumar, has once again raised a constitutional process that is much more complex than simply deciding to pass a resolution in Parliament. According to Article 324(5), a CEC has the same security as the Supreme Court judge and cannot be ousted by Parliament through a resolution.
Why does the CEC have special protection?
The Constitution bestows the Chief Election Commissioner a special status to ensure autonomy of the Election Commission. As per Article 324(5), the CEC can be removed in the same way and for the same reasons that a Supreme Court judge can be removed. This can be hugely different from a typical parliamentary motion.
A notice is only the beginning
It begins with a removal notice with a minimum of 100 signatures from MPs in the Lok Sabha or 50 MPs in the Rajya Sabha; the notice has to be submitted to the Speaker or the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha. Nevertheless, fulfilling this numeric requirement will not begin an inquiry. The relevant presiding officer must make a decision as to whether to permit the motion.
Inquiry comes before the vote
Notice is admitted by the court if a three-member inquiry committee is formed. The inquiry committee consists of; Supreme Court judge/Chief Justice of India, and High Court Chief Justice, and an eminent jurist. The committee considers the allegations and gives the CEC a chance to answer, by way of a written defense and recording of any evidence.
Parliament needs a special majority
But still, removals aren’t automatic even after an inquiry. If the committee finds the claims to be substantiated, the issue goes to Parliament. The motion for impeachment shall be supported by a special majority in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, which is at least half of the total membership of each of these houses, and two-thirds of those voting. It cannot actually initiate the removal process until the motion has been passed in both Houses.
DON'T MISS
The president has the final role
Once a motion gets passed by the both the Houses of the Parliament, a prayer addressed to the President requesting for the removal of the CEC is tabled in each House. Then, an order for removing the CEC is issued by the President.
What happened with earlier notices?
It’s not the first time the Opposition tried to remove Gyanesh Kumar. Hindustan Times reported that the Opposition MPs gave notice of moving no-confidence motion in the Parliament in March 2026 that was signed by 130 MPs in Lok Sabha and 63 MPs in Rajya Sabha. Both notices were subsequently rejected by the presiding officers at the scrutiny stage. Another Rajya Sabha notice, filed on April 24, was signed by 73 Opposition MPs and included nine new allegations; the Hindustan Times reported that this notice was still valid as of the explainer on September 28.
Why do the numbers matter?
The first signature requirement and the last voting requirement are two thresholds. You need 100 Lok Sabha MPs or 50 Rajya Sabha MPs to give a notice, but you will need the higher special majority in both houses to remove it. So getting enough signatures to give the notice does not guarantee that the MP will be removed. The Congress lacked a two-thirds majority in the Lok Sabha, and the BJP had 240 MPs in the House. While such figures are relevant to the parliamentarian arithmetic in favor of the proposal, they cannot alone decide the outcome of the constitutional process.
Why is this not an ordinary motion?
A normal parliamentary bill or motion may have different procedures, depending on what it’s about and the law for the particular bill or motion. What protects the removal of the CEC?nThere is a threshold for the notice to be initiated, then the notice is scrutinized by the presiding officer, then there is an autonomous inquiry mechanism, then a special majority in both the houses of Parliament, and then comes the presidential order. Our framework does not leave the question of resignation to the kiss of the MPs who sign a notice it creates legal conditions and protections at each step.
