New Delhi, October 1: Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi on Thursday questioned the Election Commission over changes made to the online Form 6 used for registering new voters, asking who authorised Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) to implement the alteration and who approved it within the company.
Gandhi alleged that the online version of Form 6 was changed “illegally” and referred to objections reportedly recorded by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
“The online Form 6 was changed illegally as the EC’s own Commissioners have recorded. Who at the ECI ordered Tata Consultancy Services to make that change?” Gandhi said in a post on X.
He also asked who at TCS signed off on the modification and whether the company had been pressured to implement it.
The controversy relates to an additional declaration linked to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls that was added to the online Form 6 on the ECINET platform. The declaration sought information on whether a new applicant, or their parent or grandparent, appeared in an electoral roll prepared during an earlier intensive revision.
The Election Commission has maintained that the statutory Form 6 itself was not altered and described the additional section as a separate SIR-related declaration. The poll panel subsequently decided that the declaration would apply specifically during the SIR exercise.
On September 30, the EC withdrew the additional declaration from the online Form 6 in states and Union Territories where the SIR exercise had been completed. The requirement remains available in areas where the revision process is still underway. Applicants in completed areas are now required to submit the standard Form 6 prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
Congress general secretary in charge of communications Jairam Ramesh separately alleged that the Form 6 change had been orchestrated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah. His claim was not independently established in the reports reviewed.
The dispute comes amid a wider confrontation between the Opposition and the Election Commission over the SIR process and alleged irregularities in electoral rolls.
The INDIA bloc held a meeting on Wednesday involving leaders from 19 political parties and announced a series of programmes to raise concerns over the electoral process. The opposition parties said they would organise joint “Save Democracy” marches across districts and hold major rallies.
Opposition MPs are scheduled to march to the Election Commission on October 6, while leaders of the grouping are expected to meet President Droupadi Murmu to raise their concerns regarding the revision of electoral rolls and alleged electoral irregularities.
The INDIA bloc has also demanded the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and called for faster hearings in cases concerning SIR and alleged electoral malpractices.
The latest controversy follows reports that Election Commissioners Sandhu and Joshi had raised objections on multiple occasions over decisions connected with the SIR exercise. The Indian Express reported that the two commissioners had recorded objections at least 14 times over a 10-month period concerning various decisions and orders.
The objections concerning Form 6 centred on whether the Election Commission had the authority to introduce an additional declaration into the voter enrolment process without corresponding changes to the statutory rules.
The commission later initiated steps to review the functioning of its voter-roll software. It also said that differences of opinion during internal deliberations are part of institutional decision-making and maintained that its orders have legal backing and follow prescribed procedures.
The EC’s decision to remove the additional declaration in areas where SIR has concluded has added another dimension to the dispute. While the commission has presented the move as a clarification of the requirement’s applicability during the revision exercise, Opposition parties have continued to question the manner in which the additional declaration was introduced.
Form 6 is an important part of the electoral registration process as it is used by eligible citizens seeking inclusion in electoral rolls. The debate over its online version has therefore drawn particular attention because the process affects new voters seeking registration.
The issue has also brought the role of technology vendors into the political debate. Gandhi’s questions specifically focus on the chain of responsibility between the Election Commission and TCS, which provides technology-related services associated with electoral systems.
The Election Commission has not, in the material reviewed, publicly identified an individual who ordered TCS to introduce the disputed online modification, nor has TCS publicly confirmed that it was pressured to make the change.
The controversy is unfolding as political parties prepare for further mobilisation over electoral-roll revisions. The Opposition has said it intends to continue pressing the Election Commission and the government for greater transparency, while the poll panel has defended its procedures and begun a review of the relevant technology systems.
With the additional declaration already removed in states where SIR has ended, attention is now likely to remain focused on the records surrounding its introduction, the authority under which it was implemented and the differing views recorded within the Election Commission.