SC declines urgent hearing on WB SIR pleas ahead of bypolls

The Supreme Court on Monday refused urgent hearing on an application seeking an urgent hearing on an application seeking probe into “serious deficiencies” in the special intensive revision (SIR) exercise carried out in West Bengal ahead of two bypolls in the state next week

The Supreme Court on Monday refused urgent hearing on an application seeking an urgent hearing on an application seeking probe into “serious deficiencies” in the special intensive revision (SIR) exercise carried out in West Bengal ahead of two bypolls in the state next week.

India News

Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant refused urgent listing of the application filed by West Bengal Congress leader Prasenjit Bose and directed the same to be heard on October 5, just a day before the polls.

Bose in his application filed through advocate Neha Rathi cited the recent Indian Express reports to point out discrepancies in the decision making process where the two Election Commissioners - Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had formally objected at least 14 times in the past 10 months to decisions and orders of the poll panel, including those related to the SIR of electoral rolls.

The application was mentioned by advocate Tushar Srivastava before CJI for urgent listing citing the upcoming Nandigram and Rejinagar bypolls in the state and a direction to ensure the election tribunals in West Bengal accord priority to disposal of appeals filed by voters for restoration of their names in the above two constituencies.

CJI said, “These are just by-elections,” as he agreed to hear the application on the date already assigned to the case.

Bose pointed out that out of 3.8 million appeals pending before the tribunals, a little over 100,000 appeals had been decided and at the present rate, the existing backlog would require more than 12 years to clear. About 2.2 million electors our of the 2.7 million deleted voters from the roll have filed their appeals. However, over 1.6 million appeals have been filed before the tribunals challenging the inclusion of names in the rolls.

The application questioned who authorise filing of these appeals challenging inclusion as the application urged the court to constitute an independent committee comprising former Supreme Court judges, former chief election commissioners or election commissioners, and other experts to inquire into the conduct and implementation of SIR undertaken in the 20 States and UTs.

Pending determination of the legality and propriety of these appeals, the application urged the court that the appeals against inclusion of names should not be acted upon by the tribunal and nor should any elector be deleted from the electoral roll pursuant to such appeals.

Recently, the ECI announced that a special drive shall be undertaken for re-enrolment of deleted voters coupled with the rectification of the alteration made in Form 6 (new voter form). The application said that such a decision indicates “serious deficiencies” in the process undertaken by the ECI and the material now available through news reports warrants a “comprehensive inquiry” into the SIR process.