• For the conduct of free and fair elections an independent Election Commissionhas been provided for in Article 324.

Composition and Appointment of members of Election commission:-

• India has a three member election commission. These all are appointed by the President for a term which is fixed by the President. However, conditions of service and tenure of office of the chief election commissioner and other election commissioner are determined by an act of parliament titled The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Conditions of Service) Act, 1991. This act has fixed the following
• The chief election commissioner or an election commissioner shall hold office for a term of 6 years or age of 65 years, whichever is earlier.
• The chief election commissioner and other commissioners are paid a salary equal to the salary of a judge of the Supreme Court. On retirement they are entitled to a pension payable to a judge of the Supreme Court.
• All business of the election commission shall, as far as possible, be transacted unanimously. If the chief election commissioner and other election commissioners differ in opinion on any matter, such matter shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority.
• The chief election commissioner shall not be removed from office except in like manner and on like grounds as a judge of the Supreme Court. The other election commissioners cannot be removed from office without recommendation of the CEC.

• Their conditions of service shall not be varied to their disadvantage after their appointment.
• It is the duty of the president or the governor of a state to make available to the commission , when so requested, such staff as may be necessary for the conduct of its functions.
• The Secretariat, which comprises about 300 officials, helps the Commission perform its executive functions. The secretariat is headed by two deputy election commissioners, who are selected by the Commission from the national civil service. On a state level, it’s the chief electoral officer (CEO) who supervises the election work. The Commission selects the electoral officer from senior civil servants recommended by the state government.

Whether Election commissioners and CEC are equal?

• Equal:-
  1. The President appoints Chief Election Commissionerand Election Commissioners. They have tenure of six years, or up to the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier. They enjoy the same status and receive salary and perks as available to Judges of the Supreme Court of India.
  2. Under Article 324(5), the CEC cannot suomotu exercise his power of recommending removal of an Election Commissioner because the members of the Election Commission are of equal status.
  3. Arrogation of any suomotu power will amount to an assumption of superiority, which will obliterate the equality and nullify the independent functioning of the Commission.
  4. SC in T.N. Seshan vs Union of India:-
     1. It is only in the case of the CEC that the first proviso to clause 324 (5) lays down that they cannot be varied to the disadvantage of the CEC after his appointment. Such a protection is not extended to the ECs. But it must be remembered that by virtue of the Ordinance the CEC and the ECs are placed on a par in the matter of salary etc
  5. Not equal :-
     • By a reading of Article 324(2), it is clear that the Chief Election Commissioner is a must. However, the number of other Election Commissioners may be optional.
     • Second proviso to Article 324(5) states categorically that the ECs shall not be removed from office except on the recommendation of the CEC.
     • In S.S. Dhanoa vs Union of India (1991), the Supreme Court held that it is necessary to bear these features in mind because although clause (2) of the article states that the Commission will consist of both the Chief Election Commissioner and the Election Commissioners if and when appointed, it does not appear that the framers of the Constitution desired to give the same status to the Election Commissioners as that of the Chief Election Commissioner. The Chief Election Commissioner does not, therefore, appear to be first among the equals, but is intended to be placed in a distinctly higher position
     • In the case of the CEC ,he can be removed from office in the manner and on the similar ground as a Judge of the Supreme Court whereas the ECs can be removed on the recommendation of the CEC.
     • There cannot be an Election Commission without a CEC. That is not the case with other ECs. They are not intended to be permanent incumbents. 
     • Since the ECs were not intended to be permanent appointees, they could not be granted the irremovability protection of the CEC, a permanent incumbent, and, therefore, they were placed under the protective umbrella of an independent CEC.

However, it is logical to conclude that if the Election Commission is to function as a body, such suomotu recommendation by the CEC would nullify the function of the Commission. The Election Commissioners might be working to impress the CEC  and try to be in his good books. This cannot be the intent of the Constitution under Article 324(5). Such a situation will never be conducive to an effective functioning of the Commission.

The process of appointment of election commissioner needs to be formalized:-

• Supreme court:-
  1. India has so far been very, very fair and politically neutral in the appointment of election commissioners but the Supreme Court observed that there is however a legitimate expectation in the Constitution of India that Election Commissioners, who are charged with the free and fair conduct of polls in a democracy, should be appointed through a most transparent and just process formalised by a law enacted by the Parliament.
  2. There is a gap due to the lack of a parliamentary law which transparently spells out the eligibility, criteria required for a person to be an election commissioner.
  3. There is nothing to show the procedure followed in selecting them.
  4. The Election Commissioners supervise and hold elections across the country. Their selection has to be made in the most transparent manner.
  5. Supreme court also clarified that the appointments were made by the President solely on the basis of the advice given by the political-executive at the Centre. This situation allegedly gives ample room for the ruling party to choose someone whose loyalty is ensured and renders the selection process vulnerable to manipulations and partisanship which is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
  6. In the absence of a proper law, the independence and the integrity of the Commission is being jeopardized and thus public injury is being caused.
  7. The court has observed that even the selection procedure of the CBI Director is formalised by a written law then why not a constitutional body like Election commission’s selection procedure is not transparent.
• No need of any further formalization of process:-
  1. Filtering of names of suitable persons for appointment as Election Commissioners is done under the aegis of the Prime Minister and his Cabinet, who in turn advice the President. None other than the Prime Minister is involved in the selection of the election commissioners. 

Conclusion:-

• The commission has to generate a sense of faith that the people repose in its integrity. It should function independ­ently and come heavily on the political parties indulging in rigging, booth capturing and other malpractices. A restructured and reformed Election Commission should use cybernetics and encourage new kind of electioneering through MIS.