Why Retired Officers Only? : Supreme Court's Decision Regarding Election Commissioner

Supreme Court rejects Arun Goels appointment as an EC . Justice Joseph said it is against the Constitution, that no Chief Election Commissioner or, for that matter, will have a six-year term or greater, whichever is earlier .

The list of bureaucrats recommended to the Prime Minister for selecting an Election Commissioner (EC) did not contain the name of any one individual who could complete the six-year term of the poll panel, according to the Supreme Court.The Supreme Court, however, rejected Arun Goels' appointment as an EC on Wednesday, asking the Centre for the original documents related to his appointment for review, saying it wanted to know if there was any hanky panky.His entire term in the Election Commission would be over five years.There is a statute.

Why is it that you have a pool of retired bureaucrats, why not others?Why not have a larger pool of candidates?Justice Joseph said that it is against the Constitution, that no Chief Election Commissioner or, for that matter, EC, will have a six-year term or greater, whichever is earlier.Several other factors are being considered in the same way.

Everything isn't in black and white.There are several ways of appointment, according to Justices Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy, and C T Ravikumar.Justice Roy said that the court is not opposing the government and that it is only proposing and considering the matter.Prashant Bhushan, a petitioner for Anoop Baranwal, said that there are 160 officers from the same batch and some are younger than those considered.They may have enjoyed a longer tenure as the European Commission if they had been considered, according to advocate Ashwini Upadhyay.They are elected on a seniority basis according to the convention, but the legislation is something different.

.
.
.
.