The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to examine a plea seeking
recall of its recent split verdict on whether challenges to the 2023 law
governing the appointment of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election
Commissioners should be referred to a larger Constitution bench.
On September 23, a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish
Chandra Sharma gave split opinions on whether a batch of pleas challenging the
validity of a 2023 law that excludes the Chief Justice of India from the panel
for selecting the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners
(ECs) should be referred to a larger Constitution bench.
It had said due to a difference of opinion, the matter be placed
before CJI Surya Kant on the administrative side for constitution of a bench of
appropriate strength for an effective and authoritative adjudication.
On Wednesday, a bench comprising the Chief Justice of India and
Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana was told about the recall application by
senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan.
"We will examine and take a call," the CJI said.
Sankaranarayanan told the bench that the recall application had earlier been
mentioned before a bench headed by Justice Datta, but the matter had
subsequently been released from that bench and he was asked to mention it
before the CJI.
"There is a split verdict on the Chief Election
Commissioner issue. We have mentioned an application for recall of the
judgment," the senior advocate said.
When the CJI asked whether there was any other interlocutory application
(IA), Sankaranarayanan said that a curative petition had also been filed, but
added that the recall application was a separate plea.
"A curative petition has been filed. That, I think, will
have to go in its own form. Whether it is maintainable, I don't know. Ours is
an IA seeking recall of the judgment. Curative often requires a review,"
he said.
The development comes after a two-judge bench of Justices Datta
and Sharma delivered split opinions on September 23 on the Centre's plea
seeking reference of the challenge to the 2023 law to a larger Constitution
Bench.
Justice Datta declined the Centre's request for such a
reference, while Justice Sharma favoured placing the matter before a larger
bench.