Supreme Court Takes Firm Stand on Electoral Roll Revision, Warns Against State-Level Obstruction
Chief Justice Surya Kant emphasizes timely completion of Special Intensive Revision; West Bengal gets February 14 deadline extension
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India made clear on Monday that it will not permit any hindrance to the nationwide Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, with Chief Justice Surya Kant delivering an unambiguous message to state governments across the country.
During proceedings on Monday, the apex court was addressing multiple petitions concerning the electoral roll revision exercise in West Bengal. The three-judge bench, led by CJI Kant alongside Justices Joymalya Bagchi and N V Anjaria, granted a seven-day extension for completing the SIR process in the state, moving the deadline to February 14.
The court’s stern observations came while examining compliance issues related to earlier directives. Questions were raised about the state administration’s decision to submit required documentation through email shortly before midnight on February 7, despite receiving court instructions three days earlier on February 4.
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has filed a legal challenge against the Election Commission’s methodology for conducting this electoral roll revision. Senior counsel Shyam Diwan, representing the Chief Minister, maintained that authorities had compiled and forwarded the requested information to election officials as mandated.
The bench also examined allegations contained in an Election Commission affidavit regarding the burning of official notices by unknown individuals. The court has directed the state’s Director General of Police to submit a formal statement on this matter, particularly noting the absence of any criminal complaint filed in connection with the incident.
Appearing for the Union government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta reminded the court that constitutional provisions apply equally across all states without exception.
The SIR methodology involves comprehensive door-to-door verification conducted by Booth Level Officers to create updated and accurate voter lists. This intensive process has generated controversy, with legal petitions in multiple states challenging whether the Election Commission has exceeded its constitutional authority.
The West Bengal petition specifically raises concerns about the deployment of numerous micro-observers throughout the state and questions regarding voter classifications in what officials term the “logical discrepancy” category. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, arguing for the state government, contended that misleading perceptions were being created about West Bengal’s cooperative approach.
The bench noted ongoing challenges with full compliance, observing that comprehensive lists remain incomplete despite previous deadlines. The Chief Justice stressed that designated officers must report to District Election Officers according to established protocols.
Monday’s judicial pronouncement carries significance beyond West Bengal’s borders. Similar electoral roll revision exercises are currently underway in Bihar, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and other states. The Supreme Court’s decisive position indicates its determination to ensure uninterrupted completion of this nationwide electoral verification process, irrespective of political resistance or administrative delays.
