Kolkata: In a key move to break the deadlock over West Bengal’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, the Supreme Court of India on Friday asked the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to deploy serving and retired judicial officers of the rank of Additional District Judge or District Judge to assist in adjudicating pending claims under the “logical discrepancy” category.
A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipin Pancholi, said there was an “unfortunate blame game” and a clear trust deficit between the state government and the Election Commission of India (ECI), which had stalled the process at the stage of claims and objections. Most persons issued notices have submitted supporting documents, which must be examined through a quasi-judicial process by Electoral Registration Officers (EROs).
Stating it had “hardly any other option”, the court directed district-wise deployment of judicial officers, to be assisted by ECI and state officials. It acknowledged that diverting judges to the SIR may affect regular court work and asked the High Court Chief Justice, a committee of judges, the Registrar General and district judges to consider shifting interim matters to alternate courts for a week to 10 days.
Chief Justice Paul has been asked to convene a meeting on Saturday and the same will be attended by Chief Secretary, DGP, official from the EC, Advocate General of the state.
The Bench expressed dissatisfaction over the state’s response to its February 9 order to provide officers to the ECI, noting disputes over the rank of officials appointed as EROs and AEROs. The ECI alleged it was not being provided competent Group A officers, while the state said only 69 Sub-Divisional Officers were available.
The court stressed that quasi-judicial functions require adequately trained officers and said it was nearly impossible to determine the exact status of those deployed.
It also warned the Director General of Police to furnish details of complaints and action taken on allegations of intimidation and interference during the SIR.
Petitions challenging the SIR — including by ADR and NFIW — are pending, and the Court had earlier reserved orders on broader issues. While permitting publication of the revised list after February 28, it clarified that the list would not be treated as final and directed issuance of a supplementary list after completion of the process. The matter will be heard in March.
Senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, alleged that the orders passed by the electoral roll officers are now being scrutinised by a “new species of officers” called the ‘special roll officers’.
“The ‘special roll officers’ cannot trump EROs. How can they on a wholesale basis reject what ERO has done?” Divan asked.
In a bid to balance equity, the top court said such judicial officers/former judicial officers, while adjudicating the claims and objections, shall be assisted by poll panel’s micro-observers and also by the officers of the state government.
“The circumstances being extraordinary, the entrustment of work to judicial officers and former judicial officers is also extraordinary,” the bench said.
Reacting to the order, the Trinamool Congress described the direction as a major relief, alleging large-scale pendency of logical discrepancy cases and accusing the ECI of failing in its Constitutional responsibilities.