Congress protests nationwide for CEC's resignation; Patnaik joins demand
No response on record.
Every charge set beside its reply, at equal weight, with what the record shows.
| Year | Answered | No response | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| 2021 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2022 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2024 | 8 | 0 | 8 |
| 2025 | 12 | 6 | 18 |
| 2026 | 10 | 17 | 27 |
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
No response on record.
Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta refused to stay the Act or the two appointments, saying a stay would cause 'chaos' with the Lok Sabha election fixed for 19 April to 1 June 2024. Reasons dated 22 March said the selection should have circulated full details to all members and that five candidates per vacancy prima facie meant ten for two posts. The court noted the petitioners did not question the appointees' merits.
Stay refused orally on 21 March; reasoned order dated 22 March 2024 (signed 23 March, 'only the date of the order is corrected'). A 15 March 2024 hearing before a three-judge bench (with A.G. Masih J) relisted the matter for 21 March (SCO).
The Union's reply was filed against a duplicate of this entry that has since been merged into it. The record documents Chowdhury's 12 March request for profiles and the Supreme Court's 21 March order, which refused a stay and commented on the selection procedure.