Supreme Court Issues Notice on Plea Seeking Records of How the Election Commission Ran the SIR
The Supreme Court issued notice to the Election Commission of India (ECI), the Chief Election Commissioner and the two Election Commissioners on a new petition about the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. Issuing notice means the court has asked them to file a reply.
A Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India tagged (joined) the petition with the SIR cases already pending before the court, so they will be heard together.
The petition, filed by several political leaders, says decisions during the SIR were taken without enough collective discussion inside the three-member Commission, and that eligible voters were removed without enough safeguards.
It asks for official records such as files, minutes, notings and objections recorded by the Commissioners, and access logs of the ECI's electoral-roll databases, ECINET and ERONET.
It also asks for an independent audit of deletions, booth-wise lists of deleted voters with reasons, a way to restore wrongly deleted names, and protection against deletion without notice and a hearing. It raises concerns about changes to Form 6, the form for new voters.
The petition does not question the ECI's power to hold an SIR. It challenges how the exercise was carried out. The Bench also said that issuing notice did not mean it approved of a recent protest march to the court, and stressed that no one can pressure the judiciary.
Election Commission of India (Article 324): Powers and Functions
The Election Commission of India (ECI) is the constitutional body that runs elections to Parliament, state legislatures, and the offices of President and Vice-President. Article 324 gives it "superintendence, direction and control" over preparing electoral rolls and conducting these elections. Since 1993 it has been a three-member body: one Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and two Election Commissioners (ECs). Because it has three members, the way it takes decisions matters.
The petition questions whether the three-member Commission actually deliberated together during the SIR. That is why it asks for internal files, minutes and recorded objections, which would show how the Commission's collective decision-making worked in practice.
Article 32: Right to Constitutional Remedies
Article 32 gives every person the right to go directly to the Supreme Court when a Fundamental Right is violated. It is itself a Fundamental Right, so the court cannot simply refuse such a case on the ground that another remedy exists. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar called it the "heart and soul" of the Constitution. The Supreme Court can issue orders and writs to protect these rights.
The SIR petitions have reached the Supreme Court as writ petitions. By issuing notice and tagging this plea with the pending SIR cases, the court has kept its power open to direct the ECI if it finds safeguards were missing.
ECINET and Electoral Roll Management: Technology for Voter Services
ECINET is the Election Commission of India's single digital platform that joins together more than 40 of its separate mobile apps and websites. Voters, election officials and political parties can use one login to register as voters, search the voter list, track applications and get election information. Behind it sit older back-end systems like ERONET, which officials use to actually add, change and delete names in the voter list. Together, these systems are now the backbone of how India keeps its voter list of nearly 100 crore people.
The petition asks for the access logs of ECINET and ERONET because these are the systems in which names were actually added and deleted during the SIR. If produced, the logs and booth-wise deletion lists would let the court check whether the safeguards of notice and hearing were followed.
- Supreme Court issued notice to the ECI, the CEC and two ECs on a new SIR petition; plea tagged with pending SIR cases
- Records sought: files, minutes, notings, objections of Commissioners; access logs of ECINET and ERONET
- Reliefs sought: independent audit of deletions; booth-wise lists of deleted voters with reasons; mechanism to restore wrongly deleted names; no deletion without notice and hearing
- Concern raised about changes to Form 6 (enrolment of new voters)
- Petition does not challenge the ECI's power to conduct an SIR, only its implementation
- ECI: three members since 1993; decisions by majority if not unanimous (upheld in T.N. Seshan, 1995)
- Article 32: the right to approach the Supreme Court directly for Fundamental Rights