SC: SIR in many states, but Bengal alone has so many issues with it

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court observed on Tuesday that while SIR has been conducted smoothly in other states, it is West Bengal that has generated a spate of litigation relating to electoral roll revision.

"There are many competitive complex issues in other states. Yet, SIR has been conducted so smoothly despite equally complicated issues. But there has not been any such spate of litigation. There are states - Gujarat, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh - where the deletion rate is much higher," a bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said.




Allow voter list additions till 7 days before polls: WB to SC

The court stuck to its view that West Bengal was a case apart in the SIR exercise despite senior advocate Kalyan Banerjee saying the ‘logical discrepancy’ ground was not applied in other states.

“A recent article said except West Bengal, in every other state governed by different political parties, the SIR has gone on smoothly,” the bench said.

SC had exercised its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to deploy judicial officers from West Bengal, Jharkhand and Odisha, under the supervision of the Calcutta HC Chief Justice, as electoral officers to adjudicate claims for inclusion in the voter list of those names under ‘logical discrepancy’ or ‘unmapped’ categories. Appearing for West Bengal, senior advocates Shyam Divan, Kalyan Banerjee and Menaka Guruswamy said of the 60 lakh claims, only 27 lakh have been adjudicated by the judicial officers.

The balance appears unlikely to be decided before April 6, the last date of nomination for the first phase of polling on April 23, and April 9, the last date of nomination for constituencies going to polls in second phase on April 29, they said.

It would be better if the publication of supplementary voter lists, containing names of those cleared after scrutiny, is extended till April 16 and April 22 respectively for the two-phase voting, they said, requesting that the voter lists should not be frozen on the last date of filing of nominations.

The bench said the judicial officers are working day and night without taking a single day leave and suggested that the improvements in carrying out the scrutiny work be better placed before the Calcutta HC CJ.

The bench said the election commission could help the Calcutta HC CJ and the judicial officers in first taking up adjudication of claims relating to the constituencies going to polls in the first phase and thereafter those in the second phase. However, it said the petitioner’s grievance about 14 candidates nominated to contest elections by different political parties featuring in doubtful voter category could be given priority adjudication.

Senior advocate D S Naidu, appearing for EC, told the SC that it has been suggested to the Calcutta HC CJ that the names cleared for inclusion in the voter list could be published daily through a supplementary voter list. SC posted further hearing on April 1.

When Banerjee said the judicial officers must give reasons for rejection of claims to the affected persons, the bench said the reasons cannot be supplied as of now. Supreme Court also said the EC could use available spaces in WB judicial academy to house the tribunals headed by former HC judges to hear appeals against exclusion of names.
Select The Times of India as your preferred source on Google Search