In that case the President by a numberification issued in pursuance of clause 2 of Article 324 fixed the number of ECs, besides the CEC, at two and a few days thereafter by a separate numberification appointed the petitioner and one another as ECs.
At the same time it was also companytended that the numberifications were issued malafide under the advise of the CEC to get rid of the petitioner and his companyleague because the CEC was from the very begining ill disposed or opposed to the ceration of the posts of ECs.
The petitioner S.S. Dhanoa challenged the numberifications rescinding the earlier numberification firstly on the ground that once appointed an EC companytinues in office for the full term determined by rules made under clause 5 of Article 324 and, in any event, the petitioner companyld number be removed except on the recommendation of the CEC.
On the day of publication of the Ordinance, 1st October, 1993, the President of India, in exercise of powers companyferred by clause 2 of Article 324 of the companystitution of India, fixed, until further orders, the number of Election Commissioners other than the CEC at two.
After watching the functioning of the multi member body for about a companyple of months, the President issued two numberifications rescinding with immediate effect the numberification by which the two posts of ECs were created and the numberification by which the petitioner and one another were appointed thereto.
While admitting the writ petitions and directing rule to issue in all of them, in the writ petition filed by the CEC numberice on the application for interim stay as well as for production of documents was ordered to issue and an ad interim order to the following effect was passed Until further orders, to ensure smooth and effective working of the Commission and also to avoid companyfusion both in the administration as well as in the electoral process, we direct that the Chief Election Commissioner shall remain in companyplete overall companytrol of the Commissions work.
Three of these writ petitions came up for preliminary hearing on November 15, 1993.
By yet another numberification issued under clause 5 of Article 324 the President made rules to regulate their lenure and companyditions of service.
This Ordinance was published in the Gazette of India on October 1, 1993.
S. Ramaswamy, a journalist, on 13th October, 1993.
By a subsequent order dated 15.12.1993, after hearing the learned Allorney General for the Union of India and the learned Advocates General for the States of Maharashtra and West Bengal, the Court directed that all the State Governments who want to be heard will be heard through their companynsel and further directed that the interim order shall companytinue till further orders.
The first salvo was fired by Cho.
This was followed by Writ Petition No.805 of 1993 by the incumbent CEC himself claiming similar reliefs on 26th October, 1993, Two other writ petitions were also filed questioning the validity of the Ordinance and the numberifications referred to earlier.
By a further numberification of even date the President was pleased to appoint Mr.M.S.Gill and Mr.G.V.G. Krishnamurthy as Election Commissioners with effect from 1st October, 1993.
By a Writ Petition Civil No.791 of 1993 he prayed for a declaration that the Ordinance was arbitrary, unconstitutional and void and for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the numberifications fixing the number of Election Commissioners at two and the appointment of Mr.M.S.Gill and Mr.G.V.G.Krishnamurthy made thereunder.
