NEW DELHI: As many as 73 Members of the Rajya Sabha on Friday submitted a fresh notice of motion seeking the removal of Gyanesh Kumar, alleging "proved misbehavior" under various constitutional provisions.
The 13-page notice, addressed to the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, invokes Article 324(5) of the Constitution, which allows the removal of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) in the same manner as a Supreme Court judge under Article 124(4).
It also cites Section 11(2) of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, as well as the procedures under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
"That an Address be presented to the President of India praying for the removal of Shri Gyanesh Kumar… on the ground of proved misbehavior… in respect of his conduct on and after 15 March 2026", said the motion.
The move comes days after a similar notice submitted by opposition MPs in both Houses of Parliament was rejected by presiding officers, marking the first such attempt to remove a CEC. The MPs have clarified that the present motion is a "fresh notice" distinct from the earlier one dated March 12, 2026, and is based on new allegations after March 15.
Members of opposition parties such as the Congress, TMC, SP, DMK, Left parties, Shiv Sena (UBT), NCP (SP) and RJD, and others have signed the notice, sources said.
The notice defines "proved misbehavior" to include abuse of power, partisan conduct, failure to ensure free and fair elections, defiance of judicial authority, and actions undermining institutional independence. It also cites the Supreme Court's ruling in Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India (2023), which underscored the need for impartiality in the functioning of Election Commissioners.
"An independent person [Election Commissioner] cannot be biased. Holding the scales evenly, even in the stormiest of times, not being servile to the powerful, but coming to the rescue of the weak and the wronged, who are otherwise in the right, would qualify as true independence."
"An Election Commissioner is answerable to the nation. The people of the country look forward to him so that democracy is always preserved and fostered." It is on the touchstone of this very standard that the conduct of Shri Gyanesh Kumar on and after 15 March 2026 must be judged and is found to be gravely wanting - indeed, more gravely so than at any anterior stage," it said.
The motion lists nine specific charges against the CEC, forming the core of the case. The first allegation concerns partisan enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct, accusing the CEC of failing to act on complaints about a televised address by PM Modi during the election period, while allegedly acting swiftly against opposition leaders in comparable cases.
The second charge concerns public denunciation via official channels, citing an April 8 post from the Election Commission's social media handle that allegedly targeted the TMC. The notice also flags the Kerala seal controversy, in which an official document reportedly carried the Bharatiya Janata Party seal instead of the Election Commission's, raising concerns about neutrality.
"That the physical use of the seal of a political party in place of the official seal of a constitutional body, within an office functioning under the superintendence of Shri Gyanesh Kumar, has occurred in an election-bound State is, in itself, an indicator of the institutional environment created under his leadership. The taking of disciplinary action against individual officers, though appropriate, does not discharge the superintending responsibility of Shri Gyanesh Kumar," it said.
Another charge concerns conduct at a political meeting, where a delegation led by TMC MP Derek O'Brien was allegedly abruptly dismissed, amid allegations of inappropriate remarks and refusal to engage.
"The conduct of dismissing, within five to seven minutes, and with the curt directive "get lost," a constitutionally significant delegation comprising three sitting Members and one former Member of the Council of States, including a senior practicing advocate of the Supreme Court, without hearing their grievances and without addressing the nine unanswered letters of a sitting Chief Minister constitutes conduct unbecoming of a constitutional functionary of the highest standing," it noted.
Among the most serious allegations is the mass deletion of voters in West Bengal, with the motion claiming over 90 lakh names were removed and around 34 lakh voters were unable to vote due to pending appeals. The matter has drawn scrutiny from the Supreme Court, including observations by Justice Joymalya Bagchi. The MPs also accused the CEC of failing to act on complaints of bias in election administration, including allegations of appointments and field-level conduct.
Further, the motion alleges that a controversial electoral roll revision process was extended to states such as Uttar Pradesh and proposed nationwide despite ongoing legal challenges. It also points to repeated judicial intervention, including in Arka Kumar Nag v. Election Commission of India, where the Supreme Court invoked Article 142 to address deficiencies in electoral processes.
The notice alleged misuse of authority in transfers and postings of senior bureaucrats in Tamil Nadu, including positions not directly related to election conduct.
The MPs argued that these incidents are not isolated but constitute a sustained pattern of conduct that undermines the Election Commission's independence, neutrality, and credibility.
The motion urged the Rajya Sabha Chairman to admit the notice, constitute a three-member inquiry committee, and initiate a detailed investigation. It further seeks the removal of the CEC if charges are proven, calls for his recusal from election-related duties during the inquiry, and requests that the matter be communicated to the President of India.