Kolkata: With the first phase of polling days away (April 23), a pressing concern has emerged—whether voters whose names were deleted during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) can realistically secure restoration within the two-day window ending April 6 (freezing of electoral rolls for Phase 1).
Official figures indicate that around 17 lakh names have been deleted in the ongoing revision. Of nearly 60 lakh cases flagged for adjudication, about 52 lakh have been disposed of (till the time this report was filed), leaving close to 8 lakh still pending at the time of reporting. The scale of unresolved claims has raised serious doubts over the feasibility of timely redress before polling begins. The situation is compounded by delays in operationalising the appellate tribunal mechanism. Nineteen tribunals were proposed to hear appeals arising from the revision process. However, retired Jharkhand judge Justice Tapan Sen has declined the assignment in Kolkata, citing age-related and logistical constraints, effectively reducing capacity at a crucial juncture.
In the absence of fully functional tribunals to date apparently, voters seeking restoration must navigate a tight timeline with limited institutional support. Legal experts point out that the process—submission of documents, verification, and appeals where necessary—is difficult to complete within just two days.
Tensions are also surfacing on the ground. In Malda’s Mothabari, protests have been reported over alleged voter list discrepancies, reflecting growing anxiety among residents over possible exclusion.
Confusion persists among voters who have found their names missing from the rolls.
With polling imminent, delays in adjudication could leave a significant number of eligible voters unable to exercise their franchise.
While election authorities maintain that mechanisms are in place to address genuine claims, the numbers suggest a system under strain. As the deadline approaches, the key question remains: can lakhs of affected voters reclaim their voting rights before polling, or does the timeline itself risk exclusion?