EC unsure of meeting Supreme Court deadline for issuing list of names flagged for 'logical discrepancies'

Representative image

• Voter list discrepancies cause logistical issues for Election Commission in West Bengal.
• Supreme Court orders public display of flagged voter names by local offices
• Over 1.26 crore voters affected; hearings continue till February 7

Did our AI summary help?

The Election Commission of India is staring at a logistical crunch in West Bengal as it struggles to meet the Supreme Court-mandated deadline to publicly display the names of voters flagged for "logical discrepancies" in the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

According to officials in the office of the state’s Chief Electoral Officer quoted by news agency PTI, Booth Level Officers (BLOs) were unable to begin the task in time as the required software reached them only late on Friday night.

“Even if the software reaches us at the last moment, it will be extremely difficult to download, print and display such a huge volume of data within a few hours,” a senior official has been quoted as saying, conceding uncertainty over compliance with the Court’s directions by Saturday.

On January 19, the Supreme Court had directed the Election Commission to make public the names of voters categorised under “logical discrepancies” and those listed as “unmapped”. The directive required the lists to be displayed at the most local level -- gram panchayat bhavans, block or taluka offices and ward offices -- so that affected voters are aware of objections raised against their entries.

Officials said the challenge was compounded by the fact that BLOs are already stretched with hearings under the verification process. “Logistically, this is a major challenge,” one official said.

Another added that “meeting the court’s timeline may not be feasible under the circumstances”, even though the data itself is available centrally.

The scale of the exercise is vast. Around 1.26 crore voters fall under the combined categories of data discrepancies and unmapped entries.

Of these, more than three lakh voters categorised as unmapped failed to appear for hearings despite notices being served. “Around 10 per cent of the unmapped voters did not turn up for hearings,” an official said.

The Election Commission has attempted to accelerate the process by appointing 294 additional senior micro-observers at the assembly segment level. “The objective is to ensure transparency and faster disposal of pending cases,” an official said.

The hearings are scheduled to continue till February 7, with the final electoral rolls slated for publication on February 14, although the Commission has indicated that timelines could be extended if required.

Lawyers sparred as Court stressed due process

The Supreme Court’s intervention came amid mounting concerns over the manner and scale of objections raised during the SIR. Hearing petitions related to the exercise, a Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Dipankar Datta and Joymalya Bagchi, noted that nearly two crore voters across West Bengal have already received notices.

The Court observed that objections recorded by the poll body broadly fall into three categories -- mapped, unmapped, and logical discrepancies. The last group includes issues such as mismatches in parents’ names, anomalies in age, implausible age gaps between parents and children or even grandparents, and individuals above 45 being shown as “new voters”.

Emphasising fairness, the Bench said voters must be given a genuine opportunity to respond. Objections, it directed, should be accepted within 10 days, with further time allowed for submitting documents. Even where papers are found inadequate, the Court insisted that voters must still be heard. “Wherever the document is not found satisfactory… such persons shall be given an opportunity present documents and also be heard at that very time in person or through authorised representative present with the voter,” the order said.

The human impact of the exercise was also acknowledged from the Bench. “Over 1 crore people have been notified. Please understand the stress people are suffering. We will issue directions where needed,” Justice Bagchi remarked during the hearing.

The Court further asked the West Bengal government to support the process with sufficient manpower and ensure law-and-order arrangements. It also mandated procedural safeguards: officials receiving documents must issue receipts, and written reasons must be provided at the end of the process for accepting or rejecting objections.

The hearing saw sharp exchanges between senior lawyers. Kapil Sibal, appearing for the petitioners, questioned both the criteria used and the infrastructure in place. He pointed out that only around 300 venues had been approved for hearings, even though nearly 1,900 would be required given the numbers involved. Referring to objections based on minor variations, he said discrepancies were being flagged even for spelling differences. “Please see what is the logical discrepancy… Let them publish a list with all these discrepancies etc and give a hearing date,” he urged.

Another flashpoint was the mode of communication. Senior advocate Shyam Divan flagged WhatsApp messages allegedly instructing officials to keep Booth Level Agents away from hearings. The Bench reacted sharply. “There is no question of running everything through Whatsapp. Circular has to be issued,” the CJI said.

Defending the Commission, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi cited cases involving implausible age gaps. This drew skepticism from the Bench. “How can 15 years age gap between mother and son be logical discrepancy… ? We are not in a country where child marriages are not a reality,” Justice Bagchi observed.

As arguments grew heated, even prominent names surfaced during submissions, underscoring the breadth of the exercise. At one point, Dwivedi remarked, “Enough for tomorrow’s paper,” drawing an immediate retort from the petitioners’ side: “Yes, Yes it is clear that you are doubting everybody.”