25 Sep 2026
Neta·Resume
Rahul Gandhi dissented: Asked that the decision wait for the Supreme Court hearing two days later, objected to the Chief Justice's removal from the panel in a dissent note, and did not take part in further proceedings. He published the note the next day.
Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury dissented: Recorded dissent on procedure: 212 names sent the night before and a six-name shortlist eight to ten minutes before the meeting. He said he had nothing against the two appointees. source ↗ response ↗
Education: B.Tech Civil Engineering, IIT Kanpur; Business Finance, ICFAI; Environmental Economics, HIID, Harvard University - per ECI profile
The source lists these without dates. They appear in the source's order.
In its reply to the stay applications, the Union of India set out the timeline from 1 February and said the selection meeting was moved from 15 to 14 March on 9 March, before the court listed the stay applications for 15 March. It said the Act was made as Article 324(2) contemplates.
The reply as recorded in the court's order does not address why names were circulated only on the day of the meeting.
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.
See all charges and answers →