On Friday, the Supreme Court stepped into the ongoing tussle between the Election Commission of India and the West Bengal Government over the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, ordering that serving and former judicial officers be appointed to decide pending claims and objections. The move, triggered by what the Court described as a breakdown of trust between two constitutional authorities, is aimed at safeguarding the integrity of the voter list ahead of its scheduled publication.
The dispute centred on whether the State had deployed adequate officers of appropriate rank to function as Electoral Registration Officers (EROs). While the State maintained it had complied with earlier directions, the Commission alleged that officers competent to pass quasi-judicial orders were not made available.
The controversy was compounded by objections over the role of micro-observers and special roll observers in scrutinising claims, with each side accusing the other of overreach and non-cooperation. Frustrated by the impasse and repeated allegations, the Bench signalled that the ongoing friction risked derailing the revision process.
Calling the situation “an unfortunate blame game” reflective of a “trust deficit between two Constitutional bodies,” the Court directed the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to depute judicial officers, including those of the rank of District Judge or Additional District Judge, to adjudicate pending claims under the ‘logical discrepancy’ category.
These officers will be assisted by state officials and ECI personnel. The Court allowed publication of the final electoral roll on February 28 where the process stands completed, with liberty to issue supplementary lists thereafter. It also mandated logistical support from district authorities and sought a compliance affidavit from the State’s police chief on complaints of threats to SIR officials.
Picture Source :
