R. Venkataramani

Datta-Sharma bench begins hearing challenge; refuses Centre's adjournment

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma began hearing the petitions on 6 May 2026 and refused the Solicitor General's request to adjourn. Petitioners argued Sections 7 and 8 give the executive a decisive say, and on 7 May that the Act is worse than the pre-2023 position because it builds in an executive majority.

Hearing dates are documented in the judgment; arguments are from SCO and TOI reports.

• TIER 1 · PRIMARYDr. Jaya Thakur v. Union of India, W.P. (C) No. 14 of 2024 and connected matters, 2026 INSC 1040: opinions of Datta J and Sharma J and common orderSupreme Court of India (PDF hosted by Supreme Court Observer)2026-09-23
• TIER 2 · RESEARCH/FILINGECI Appointments Act, 2023 | Day 2: Petitioners challenge executive dominanceSupreme Court Observer2026-05-06
• TIER 2 · RESEARCH/FILINGECI Appointments Act, 2023 | Day 3: Petitioners argue that law undermines guarantee of free and fair electionsSupreme Court Observer2026-05-07
• TIER 3 · PRESSWish judges appointed as speedily as ECs, says Supreme CourtThe Times of India2026-05-08