Around 73 Opposition MPs in the Rajya Sabha on Friday moved a fresh motion for the removal of chief election commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, sources said.
The move came a day after voting was conducted for the 234-member Tamil Nadu state Assembly and the first phase of polling was concluded in Bengal.
“This fresh notice is founded upon a distinct and freshly accrued foundation,” the letter submitted to Vice President and Rajya Sabha chairman C.P. Radhakrishnan said.
“It is confined to acts and omissions of Gyanesh Kumar occurring on and after March 15, 2026 each of which independently, and all of which cumulatively, constitute proved misbehaviour of the gravest character.”
The Opposition MPs have demanded a three-member inquiry committee with one sitting judge from the Supreme Court, a sitting chief justice from any of the high courts and other courts which must submit its report to the Rajya Sabha chairman.
Till the committee submits its report, Gyanesh Kumar should recuse himself from all election-related responsibilities, the letter demanded.
On March 12, a total of 63 Opposition Rajya Sabha MPs had moved a motion to remove Kumar and a similar motion was moved in the Lok Sabha as well.
Notices signed by 63 Rajya Sabha members and 130 Lok Sabha members on March 12 were rejected by the Rajya Sabha chairman Radhakrishnan and Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla on April 6 on the ground of lack of evidence.
In the fresh motion, the Rajya Sabha MPs have accused Kumar of “continued partisan asymmetry in the enforcement of the model code of conduct.”
The MPs cited a 29-minute speech by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, telecast live on state-run Doordarshan and Sansad TV and also aired on All India Radio on March 18.
The MPs alleged that the speech, delivered a day after the Modi government’s bid to introduce a constitutional amendment for delimitation failed to get enough numbers on the floor of the Lower House, was “substantially identical” to one that Modi had made the same day during an election campaign in Tamil Nadu’s Coimbatore.
“The Prime Minister named and denounced the Indian National Congress, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, the All India Trinamool Congress and the Samajwadi Party – all parties then in direct electoral contest with the BJP – and accused them of “foeticide” in respect of the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026 and being “criminals against the Constitution of the country,” and expressly urged the voters of Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh and Kerala to act against them,” the letter pointed out.
Of the four states mentioned, polling in Kerala was already complete by then and Tamil Nadu and Bengal were yet to start voting at the time of the speech.
The letter stated that Opposition Rajya Sabha MPs – Manoj Kumar Jha of the RJD, P. Sandosh Kumar of the CPI and M.A. Baby of the CPM – had filed a complaint with the CEC on April 19 and a day later 700 citizens had submitted a memorandum calling out the PM’s comments.
“As on the date of this notice, Gyanesh Kumar has issued no show-cause notice, no advisory and no public response to any of the said complaints,” the MPs adding that the lack of response was in contrast to the stand taken by the central poll panel during past elections.
“In stark contrast to the inaction described, the commission under Gyanesh Kumar had shown an alacrity of action in respect of analogous complaints filed by the BJP against Opposition leaders, including the Congress. The pattern of differential enforcement is a continuation of the very conduct that was the subject of the earlier notice of motion,” the letter read.
The Opposition has cited examples like the BJP seal on a notice issued by the commission in Kerala, a post made by the poll panel on its X handle conveying a stern message to the ruling Trinamool in Bengal on conducting peaceful and violence-free polls in the state, the mass disenfranchisement of voters in Bengal following the special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls among other issues.
Due to the SIR, Bengal’s electorate has shrunk by 91 lakh; around 34 lakh of them have appealed against the EC action and are awaiting appellate tribunal clearance for restoration of their voting rights.