Vice Presidential polls to be held on 9 September, nominations from 7 August: Election Commission
The poll panel said that the election notification will be issued on 7 August, and the last date for filing nominations is 21 August. The nominations will be scrutinised on 22 August, and the last date for withdrawing nominations will be 25 August, as per the schedule.
The announcement comes after Jagdeep Dhankhar resigned as Vice President on 21 July, opening the contest for his successor.
Dhankhar, 74, assumed office in August 2022, and his tenure was till 2027.
As per Article 66(1) of the Constitution, the Vice President of India is elected by an Electoral College comprising the elected members of the Rajya Sabha, the nominated members of the Rajya Sabha, and the elected members of the Lok Sabha.
Issue of Election Commission's notification 7 August, 2025 Last date of filing nominations 21, August, 2025 Date of Scrutiny of nominations 22, August, 2025 Last Date of Withdrawal of nominations 25, August, 2025 Date of Poll, if required 09, September, 2025 Hours of Polls 10 AM to 5 PM Date of Counting 09, September, 2025
The Election Commission said the polling, if necessary, will be held on 9 September, and the counting will be held on the same day.
According to Articles 63 to 71 of the Constitution and the Vice-President (Election) Rules, 1974, a formal election must be held within 60 days of Dhankhar's resignation and before 19 September 2025.
The electorate or the electoral college comprises all members of both Houses of Parliament—elected and nominated—using a proportional representation system via a single transferable vote. The MPs will cast a single transferable vote with a secret ballot.
The electoral college currently has 788 MPs, 588 in Lok Sabha and 245 in Rajya Sabha.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
25 minutes ago
- Hans India
Bihar's electoral overhaul: Balancing integrity and inclusion in India's democracy
The Election Commission of India's (ECI) recent initiative to undertake a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar has ignited a fervent debate, blending legal imperatives with political undercurrents. Announced in June, this comprehensive exercise, the first of its kind in the state since 2003, aims to update voter lists with July 1, 2025, as the qualifying date. With Bihar's Assembly elections looming later this year, the timing has amplified concerns about potential disenfranchisement, particularly among migrant workers and marginalized communities. Yet, at its core, the SIR represents a statutory effort to safeguard the sanctity of India's democratic process—one that demands a balanced scrutiny of its legal foundations, procedural rigor, and societal impacts. The ECI's authority to conduct such revisions is firmly rooted in the Constitution. Article 324 grants the Commission sweeping powers over the 'superintendence, direction, and control' of elections, including the preparation and maintenance of accurate electoral rolls. This is reinforced by Article 326, which enshrines universal adult suffrage, entitling every Indian citizen aged 18 or above—barring disqualifications like non-residence or criminal convictions—to vote. These provisions underscore a commitment to inclusivity while empowering the ECI to eliminate inaccuracies that could undermine electoral fairness. Parliament has translated these constitutional ideals into actionable law through the Representation of the People Act, 1950. Section 21 of the Act explicitly authorizes the ECI to prepare and revise electoral rolls, a process elaborated in the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. Under Rule 25, revisions can be intensive, summary, or hybrid, allowing flexibility based on need. An intensive revision, as chosen for Bihar, involves meticulous steps outlined in Rules 4 to 23, including door-to-door enumeration and verification. This ensures thoroughness, requiring enumerators to collect details from households and cross-check against a list of 11 specified documents, such as passports, driving licenses, or ration cards—expanded from seven in previous exercises, which the Supreme Court has noted as a 'voter-friendly' measure. The rationale for reviving an intensive approach after over two decades is straightforward yet profound. Bihar's population has surged, with urbanisation and migration reshaping its demographics. The 2003 revision, the last comprehensive one, predates significant shifts, including the exodus of millions for work opportunities elsewhere. Bogus entries—deceased voters, duplicates, or those who have relocated—persist as a perennial threat, potentially distorting outcomes and violating the 'one person, one vote' principle. The ECI's drive seeks to purge these anomalies while enrolling new voters, especially the youth turning 18. As of July 12, over 74 per cent of Bihar's approximately 7.9 crore electors had submitted enumeration forms, indicating robust participation in the process. This high response rate suggests the exercise is gaining traction, though challenges remain in reaching remote or transient populations. However, SIR has not escaped controversy. Critics, including civil society groups, allege it risks mass exclusion, with reports emerging of draft rolls containing errors like incorrect photographs or entries for deceased individuals. Petitions before the Supreme Court, led by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), claim that around 65 lakh names were omitted from the draft roll without adequate justification, disproportionately affecting migrants, the poor, and minorities. These groups argue that the process violates statutory rights, as voters have a legal entitlement to remain on rolls unless proven ineligible. The exclusion of Aadhaar as a verification document has been praised for broadening options but questioned for its potential to complicate verification in a state where digital access varies. In response, the ECI has emphasised that SIR is a routine purification effort, not a deletion drive. It has assured the Supreme Court that no name will be removed without prior notice, a reasoned order, and appeal rights. The Commission maintains that it is not legally obligated to publish a separate list of excluded voters or reasons for omissions, viewing the draft roll as a provisional document open to corrections. During ongoing hearings, the apex court has sought details on the 2003 revision's methodology, signalling a desire for transparency in historical precedents. Notably, while individual voters have filed thousands of objections, no recognized political party has formally flagged errors in the draft, per ECI reports. This absence of partisan complaints underscores that the controversy may stem more from apprehension than widespread malpractice. The debate extends beyond Bihar, highlighting systemic tensions in India's electoral framework. Similar revisions in other states, like Andhra Pradesh and Telangana in recent years, have faced scrutiny for alleged biases, yet they have ultimately bolstered roll accuracy. The political stakes are high in Bihar: the state's 243 Assembly seats could see shifts if migrant voters—estimated at over two crore—are underrepresented. Demographic data from the 2011 Census, adjusted for growth, reveals that Scheduled Castes and Muslims, often economically vulnerable, form significant voter blocs; any perceived exclusion could erode trust in the system. Objectively, the ECI's actions align with global best practices for electoral hygiene. Countries like the United States and the United Kingdom periodically purge rolls to combat fraud, though with safeguards against voter suppression. In India, the ECI's recent delisting of 334 Registered Unrecognized Political Parties (RUPPs) as part of broader clean-up efforts reflects a proactive stance against electoral malpractices. However, implementation on the ground matters. House-to-house surveys, while thorough, can be susceptible to human error or bias in a polarized environment. Enhancing digital tools, such as the Voter Helpline app, could mitigate this, allowing self-verification and reducing dependency on enumerators. The Supreme Court's observations in related matters offer valuable guidance. In the ADR vs. ECI case on electronic voting machines, the court cautioned against 'blind distrust' that breeds scepticism, urging evidence-based reforms and trust-building through dialogue and transparency. As echoed in Paragraph 37 of that judgment, democracy thrives on harmony among citizens, judiciary, representatives, and electoral bodies. Para 38 expresses hope that the system will reflect the electorate's true mandate. These principles apply aptly here: while the ECI's authority to decide the timing and mode of SIR is exclusive, fostering public confidence requires proactive disclosure and inclusive outreach. Bihar's SIR embodies the delicate balance between electoral purity and inclusivity. Legally sound and procedurally robust, it addresses long-standing flaws in voter lists, yet its success hinges on equitable execution. As petitions unfold in the Supreme Court, stakeholders must prioritize evidence over rhetoric. A transparent, participatory process will not only fortify Bihar's upcoming polls but also reinforce India's democratic resilience. By embracing continuous improvement, as the apex court advocates, we can ensure every eligible voice is heard, unmarred by doubt or exclusion. (The writer is a senior Advocate)
Hans India
2 hours ago
- Hans India
Ensure welfare schemes will reach all, CS to officials
Vijayawada: Chief secretary K Vijayanand on Friday said that the state government had set a target to make the state free from single-use plastic by World Environment Day, June 5, 2026. As a first step, the ban has been enforced in the state Secretariat from Friday, and the initiative will be extended in phases to all municipal corporations, towns, and villages. Speaking as the chief guest at the 79th Independence Day celebrations held at the Secretariat, Vijayanand said plastic pollution is a grave threat to the environment and human survival. He stressed the need for collective responsibility to protect natural resources for future generations. Paying tributes to the Father of the Nation Mahatma Gandhi, the architect of the Constitution Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the designer of the national flag Pingali Venkaiah, revolutionary leader Alluri Sitarama Raju, and all other freedom fighters, the Chief Secretary said Independence Day is an occasion to recall the sacrifices of great leaders who fought for the country's freedom. Highlighting the government's welfare agenda, he said both the Centre and the state are implementing several development and social security schemes aimed at uplifting the poor. He urged officials and employees to work with dedication to ensure that every eligible beneficiary, even in the remotest village, receives the benefits. Vijayanand also spoke about the Swarna Andhra P-4 Foundation launched to eradicate poverty and reduce economic inequalities, and called for committed efforts to make the programme a success. Principal secretary (GAD) Mukesh Kumar Meena, CSO Mallikarjuna, senior police officers, staff, and Secretariat employees attended the programme. As part of the celebrations, Vijayanand paid floral tributes to Mahatma Gandhi, unfurled the national flag, and later distributed sweets to children.
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
How inclusive is the Election Commission of India's special revision exercise?
The ongoing special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar has led to a discussion that goes beyond a mere update to the voter list. As part of this initiative, discussions have been held on requiring certain proof of identity and citizenship — most notably, the birth certificate — for voter list verification. As the Election Commission continues to insist that its demand for documents is reasonable, and that most voters do have at least one of these documents, the issue has assumed critical importance, especially in light of the proposal to expand the SIR exercise to other States. Opponents of the SIR have been arguing that such an exercise will only lead to the exclusion of a large number of voters. In a democracy, the broadest possible inclusion of all eligible persons on the electoral rolls is the most basic requirement of a free and fair election system. Therefore, finding out which documents voters actually possess, who are the ones less likely to possess such documents, and what might be the proportion of citizens likely to face exclusion from electoral rolls, are critical matters in assessing the feasibility and inclusivity of measures such as the SIR. In a country as socio-economically and geographically diverse as India, documentation access varies widely due to differences in administrative infrastructure, historical record-keeping, literacy levels, and public awareness. Above all, the State-level capacity and practice of record-keeping and the process of making documents easily available to citizens are variables that may result in exclusion in some States more than in others. Lokniti-CSDS conducted a study across the States of Assam, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal and the National Capital Territory of Delhi to understand the types of documents people possess and their views on making the birth certificate and similar other documents compulsory for voter verification. The larger picture In spite of the ongoing debate in the media, only a little over one-third (36%) of respondents from our entire sample were aware of the SIR exercise or the documents that are required. More than half of the respondents said that they do not have a birth certificate. At least two in five did not have a domicile certificate or a caste certificate. As required by the SIR, those born after 1987 have an additional responsibility of having citizenship proof of at least one of their parents (and for both parents if born after 2003). Data from the survey show that this is a far more difficult condition to fulfil for the vast majority of the respondents. While at least two-thirds said they did not have their parents' birth certificates, a similar proportion said they had neither an Secondary School Certificate (SSC) certificate nor a caste certificate. How does this lack of necessary documents pan out across the States? Clearly, it will exclude some citizens and more importantly, citizens from weaker sections in particular will have to keep running from pillar to post to obtain the documents or face exclusion. India's no-document citizens Roughly 5% of respondents did not have any of the 11 documents mandated by the EC. While there are slightly more women than men in this category of 'No Document Citizens', three-fourths of them are from the lower half of the economic order, while more than one-fourth are SC, and over 40% are OBC. EC's demand for birth certificate The proportion of respondents having a birth certificate issued by a local or government authority varies widely, as highlighted in Table 4. At the lower end, Madhya Pradesh records only 11%, indicating large documentation gaps. Assam (36%) and Kerala (38%) fall in the mid-range, while Delhi (44%) and West Bengal (49%) areslightly better. Even in these States, at the higher end, at least half of the respondents do not have the document. Within households, as shown in Table 5, the coverage of birth certificates among members aged above 18 remains low. Only Kerala and West Bengal report that three in 10 households have all adult members with a certificate, while in Madhya Pradesh, just 2% reported the same, and close to four in 10 say none of the adults have it. Assam and Uttar Pradesh also show low full-coverage rates — 14% and 12%, respectively. Is it really easy to obtain a birth certificate? If the requirements were made mandatory, exclusion risks would be high in some States, as highlighted in Table 6. In Kerala, four in 10 believe they would not be able to obtain the certificate, and in Madhya Pradesh, over one-third say the same. Even in States with somewhat higher current possession rates, such as Delhi and Assam, around one-fifth foresee being unable to comply. Difficulty in obtaining such certificates is most pronounced in Delhi (46% 'very difficult'), followed by Kerala (41%), Madhya Pradesh (40%), and West Bengal (41%). Very few in any State report already having all necessary documents (Table 7). Availability of documents asked by EC When looking at other forms of identification, possession of educational and domicile-related documents varies sharply across States. The Class 10 certificate is most common in Kerala (85%), followed by Delhi (68%), West Bengal (66%), and Assam (61%). Uttar Pradesh is slightly lower at 56%, while Madhya Pradesh records the lowest share (40%). Domicile certificates show a similar disparity. The highest reporting is in Kerala (65%) and the lowest in West Bengal (35%), with Delhi at 57%, Uttar Pradesh (55%), Madhya Pradesh (51%), and Assam slightly lower at 49%. Caste certificates range from 65% in Kerala and 60% in Assam to just 19% in West Bengal, with about half of respondents in Madhya Pradesh (51%), Delhi (51%), and Uttar Pradesh (48%). National Register of Citizens documents are only relevant in Assam, where possession is near-universal (96%) (Table 8). Special-category documents such as forest rights certificates, land allotment certificates, or family registration certificates are unevenly distributed. Assam and Kerala show higher possession of some of these, while Delhi and States such as Uttar Pradesh have minimal coverage, implying that these cannot serve as universal substitutes (Table 9). Government-issued identity cards or pension orders are most common in Kerala (74%) and West Bengal (50%), while it is 43% in Assam and 37% in Madhya Pradesh. Its possession is extremely low in Uttar Pradesh (10%) and Delhi (4%). Pre-1987 government or Public Sector Undertaking (PSU) identity documents are scarce in all States, with West Bengal recording the highest at 27%. followed by Assam (19%), Kerala (18%), Madhya Pradesh (13%), Delhi (3%) and Uttar Pradesh (1%) (Table 10). Overall, the possession of most documents varies sharply by State. Aadhaar is the only exception, being near-universal and consistent across regions, yet it was excluded by the EC from use in the SIR exercise in Bihar. This exclusion could create a significant barrier for voters, particularly in States where alternative documents are rare, region-specific, or unevenly distributed, making a fixed, nationally applied SIR-eligible list risk disproportionately disenfranchising certain populations. More difficult if born after 1987 The absence of parental birth certificates is especially high in Madhya Pradesh (87% for both parents) and significant in Uttar Pradesh (72% mothers, 64% fathers) and West Bengal (68% mothers, 70% fathers). Assam and Kerala have comparatively lower absence rates, around 56% to 60% for mothers and 52% to 57% for fathers, but still represent more than half of the respondents. SSC certificate possession shows a similar pattern: Madhya Pradesh again records the highest absence (87% mothers, 78% fathers), with substantial gaps in Uttar Pradesh (68% mothers, 55% fathers) and Assam (64% mothers, 59% fathers). Kerala stands out with far lower absence for mothers (31%) and fathers (37%). For caste certificates, the highest absence is in West Bengal (76% mothers, 74% fathers) and Madhya Pradesh (72% mothers, 63% fathers). Assam and Kerala again record relatively lower absence rates (around 37% to 43%). (Table 11). Overall, the data show that in many States, large numbers of people lack these parental documents, particularly in Madhya Pradesh and parts of Uttar Pradesh, posing a serious obstacle in the SIR exercise, where such documents may be required to establish eligibility. Challenge of inclusivity The above findings point to some important issues. As part of updating the electoral rolls and ensuring that errors of commission and omission are avoided, it is crucial that the review process offers a solution to the challenges faced rather than adding to the complications. Firstly, it is clear from the survey undertaken that there is significant variation across States on individuals having the documents required under the current SIR process. Taking forward the exercise within the current framework of requirements could pose a serious challenge for many of those who have a legitimate right to be part of the voters' list. The challenges in this regard are on account of multiple factors — the capacity of the Indian state (government authorities in general) to make available such documents and the inherent limitations in the record-keeping function, multiple barriers faced by individuals to secure the required documents and the inability to produce documents that needed to have been collected by the previous generation. While cleansing of the electoral rolls is important, the exercise, as it is currently being undertaken, is likely to lead to the deletion of many legitimate names on the grounds that they are unable to provide the necessary documents. Above all, the data here draw attention to the most critical dimension — citizens' access to and possession of many documents being very limited. It then becomes about the willingness of and special efforts by government authorities to include all citizens in its record-keeping function. Suhas Palshikar taught political science and is chief editor of Studies in Indian Politics; Krishangi Sinha is a researcher with Lokniti-CSDS; Sandeep Shastri is director-Academics, NITTE Education Trust and national coordinator of the Lokniti Network; and Sanjay Kumar is professor and co-director, Lokniti-CSDS
