In a significant intervention aimed at ensuring transparency in electoral processes, the Supreme Court has ordered the deployment of judicial officers to oversee the disposal of claims and objections arising from the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal.
The court cited a deep trust deficit between the state administration and the Election Commission, warning that the revision process risked being stalled without neutral supervision.
In an unprecedented move, a Bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipin Pancholi, directed that serving and retired judicial officers be deployed across districts in West Bengal.
The Bench said judicial supervision was necessary to ensure fair disposal of claims and objections related to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.
The court instructed the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to nominate judicial officers, including retired judges of the rank of District Judge or Additional District Judge, to assist with the process.
These officers will work alongside officials from the Election Commission of India and the state administration to verify and decide claims filed by voters.
The Bench observed that the SIR process had been hindered by a lack of cooperation between the Government of West Bengal and the Election Commission.
The court noted an “unfortunate blame game of allegations and counter-allegations” between the two constitutional authorities, resulting in a breakdown of trust and delays in the revision exercise.
The dispute has primarily centred on claims and objections filed by voters whose names appeared in the “logical discrepancy list”.
The court noted that many individuals had already submitted documents supporting their inclusion in the electoral rolls. However, the claims must be adjudicated through a quasi-judicial process conducted by Electoral Registration Officers (EROs).
Judicial officers will now assist in reviewing and disposing of these cases district-wise to ensure transparency and fairness.
The Supreme Court said it had “hardly any other option” but to introduce judicial oversight to restore confidence in the process.
Acknowledging that the deployment of judges could affect normal judicial functioning, the court asked the Calcutta High Court administration to consider shifting interim relief matters to alternative courts for about a week or ten days.
The Bench emphasised the need for administrative coordination so that both court work and the SIR exercise could proceed smoothly.
The court clarified that the Election Commission may publish a provisional voter list after February 28 while continuing the revision process.
However, the Bench ruled that any list published after that date would not be treated as final, and a supplementary list must be issued after the completion of the Special Intensive Revision.
The matter is scheduled for further hearing in March.
