24 Sep 2026
Neta·ResumeRahul 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.
Education: PhD and Master's in International Economics, Graduate Institute, Geneva; Executive Master's in International Business, IIFT New Delhi; B.E. Mechanical, University of Roorkee (1987) - per ECI profile
The source lists these without dates. They appear in the source's order.
The Commission said written notes and differing views among its members are standard deliberation before decisions, that Commissioners' suggestions were for improving processes, and that all its decisions over the past year, including the SIR, were unanimous decisions of the full Commission. It said ECINET runs under strict security and audit controls and that EROs and DEOs exercise their statutory powers of registration and deletion.
Signed by P. Pawan, Deputy Director. The note does not deal with the specific objections on Form 6, ERONet access, the 28 July work allocation order or the West Bengal appeals.
The Commission's reply says its decisions were unanimous. Section 18 of the 2023 Act sets when unanimity is required and when a majority decides.
See all charges and answers →The Supreme Court's judgment of 27 May 2026 concerned the Bihar SIR; it held that exercise traceable to Section 21(3) of the RP Act, 1950.
See all charges and answers →Section 18 of the 2023 Act sets how the three members decide: allocation of work only by unanimous decision, other business unanimously as far as possible, otherwise by majority.
See all charges and answers →