New Delhi, Oct. 6 -- The Supreme Court on Monday declined to pass an interim order restraining Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar from functioning over allegations that he took several decisions unilaterally despite objections from the two other election commissioners (ECs), saying it could not proceed on "assumptions" without first verifying the facts. A bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, issued notice to the Election Commission of India, the Union government, the CEC and two ECs, on a petition filed by social activist Rakesh Kumar Singh, while making it clear that any decision found to have been taken contrary to the statutory requirement governing the functioning of the poll panel could subsequently be injuncted. Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the petitioner, sought an immediate suspension of Kumar and alternatively urged the court to direct the Election Commission to take only unanimous decisions until the next hearing. Singh relied on the 1993 amendments to the election law to contend that, as far as possible, decisions of the Commission were required to be taken unanimously. He also referred to the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, particularly Section 18, which provides for majority decision-making where there is a difference of opinion. "There is a distinction. The unanimity relates to transaction of business and allocation of work, while functioning can be by majority," Singh submitted. But the bench questioned him on what had changed from the 1993 legal position. Singh said the 2023 law had also introduced Section 16, which conferred a level of immunity on the CEC and election commissioners that was "unheard of", including protection extending beyond their tenure. "A protection while in office is understood," the bench observed.P4...