OPINION | As SIR of electoral rolls enters second phase, Opposition and legal challenges intensify 

A day before the enumeration process for the second phase started on 4th November, DMK filed a petition under Article 32 challenging the constitutional validity of the entire process.

It argues that SIR violates Articles 10, 14, 19, 21, and 326 of the Constitution by infringing the right to vote, equality, and dignity. It also violates the basic structure of the Constitution by undermining universal adult suffrage and the federal principle.

Among the many concerns raised by the petitioners, one key argument is that a Special Summary Revision (SSR) had already been conducted in Tamil Nadu between October 2024 and January 6, 2025. During this period, the electoral roll was updated to incorporate changes such as migration, deaths, and the deletion of ineligible voters. The revised roll was published on January 6, 2025, and has been continuously updated since then.

Claims of Constitutional Overreach

The petition submits that the ECI’s decision constitutes a constitutional overreach. It is contended that the powers vested in the ECI under Article 324 of the Constitution are exercisable only in areas which are unoccupied by existing legislation.

The petition alleged that the SIR seeks to “supplant the existing statutory framework which already governs the preparation and revision of electoral rolls. The manner in which the SIR has been directed to be conducted is found neither in ROPA nor the 1960 Rules, and the said exercise departs from the procedure prescribed therein and is therefore ultra vires of the same.”

The petition further adds that Section 28(3) of the Representation of the People Act (RPA) requires all Rules to be notified in the Official Gazette and laid before Parliament. No such notification has been issued for the SIR, and the same has not been laid before the Parliament. Therefore, the SIR is without the force of law and lacks a statutory basis.

Article 324 of the Constitution vests the ECI with Superintendence, direction, and control of elections.

Concerns Over Disenfranchisement

The petitioners have alleged that the process will lead to mass disenfranchisement. “The documentation requirements of the directive, lack of due process as well as the unreasonably short timeline for the said Special Intensive Revision of Electoral Roll in the State of Tamil Nadu further make this exercise bound to result in removal of names of lakhs of genuine voters from electoral rolls, leading to their disenfranchisement", the petition states.

Another issue raised in the petition is that the SIR is “disadvantageous” to the marginalised community. The petition reads: SIR’s rigid and arbitrary document requirement fails to accommodate the realities of disadvantaged communities who face chronic under-documentation. They also disproportionately burden the youth, migrants, women, economically weaker sections and marginalised communities, who are least likely to be able to furnish such records within the unreasonably truncated timeline prescribed. This inequity is further aggravated by the arbitrary exclusion of widely accepted government-issued identity documents, despite such documents carrying a statutory presumption of correctness.

There are some technical grounds also on which the SIR has been challenged. According to the petitioners, under Clause 3 of the 24.06.2025 order (related to the first phase of SIR), Booth Level Officers (BLOs) are required to conduct House-to-House Enumeration and provide electors with enumeration forms and later collect them. The petition contends that “neither ROPA nor the 1960 Rules mention any such forms.”

It has been contended that voters are required to furnish documents only from a restricted list of thirteen prescribed proofs, to which Aadhaar was subsequently added on September 9, 2025. It is further alleged that commonly used identity documents such as Ration Cards, PAN Cards, and even the Electors Photo Identity Card (EPIC) have been excluded from the permissible list.

The petition highlights an important point that if the voter does not provide a document, they will be required to fill out a Form 6 application during the claims and objections period, i.e., after the publication of the draft rolls. This means that the names of such voters will automatically be deleted from the draft rolls, thus allowing the mass exclusion of voters from the electoral rolls in a completely subjective or arbitrary manner.

The allegations of “absurd subjectivity” and “too much discretion” to BLOs and Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) are also part of the petition. It states that the SIR guidelines allow for an absurd amount of subjectivity and afford BLOs and EROs too much discretion.

The petition states: “Under Clause 3, BLOs are required to conduct House to House Enumeration and provide electors with enumeration forms, help them fill the same, and later collect them. It is relevant to note that neither ROPA nor the 1960 Rules mentions any such forms. It may also be noted that Officers (BLOs) will only receive minimal training to i.e., 5 days of training, to carry out the herculean task of reaching lakhs of voters.”

Supreme Court to Examine ECI’s Powers

In July 2015, the Association for Democratic Reform (ADR) challenged the validity of SIR before the apex court. The Supreme Court on July 10 passed an order in ADR petition and connected matters, stating that: After hearing both the sides, prima facie, we are of the opinion that there are following three questions are involved in these petitions:- a) the very powers of the Election Commission to undertake the exercise; b) the procedure and the manner in which the exercise is being undertaken; and c) the timings, including the timings given for preparation of the Draft Electoral Rolls, asking objections of making final Electoral Roll etc., which is very short, considering the fact that Bihar Elections are due in November 2025 and the Notification will come in advance weeks earlier.

From alleged infringement of fundamental rights and dilution of the democratic spirit to procedural and technical irregularities, the petition has raised a wide range of objections. These contentions are expected to be examined in light of the two principal questions framed by the Court, as stated above. The Apex Court is scheduled to hear the matter today, when Bihar goes to the polls for the final phase of its election, in which this issue has emerged as one of the most significant points of debate.