The Supreme Court on Monday extended the deadline for filing objections to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal by one week, moving the cut off date from February 14 to February 21. The decision comes amid concerns over large scale discrepancies in voter records and the capacity of election officials to handle complaints.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and N.V. Anjaria also directed 8,505 West Bengal government officials to report for duty before district electoral offices by 5 pm on February 10. The court ordered that the Election Commission must utilise these officials as Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) or Assistant Electoral Registration Officers (AEROs) if they are found suitable.
The bench clarified that officials who are not assigned as EROs or AEROs may be deployed as micro observers to assist in the verification process. However, the court stressed that only the EROs will have the authority to take final decisions on the inclusion or exclusion of names from the electoral rolls.
During the hearing, the Supreme Court expressed serious concern over the functioning of the software tools used by the Election Commission for voter verification. The bench observed that the system appeared “Very Restrictive” and failed to consider natural variations in Indian names.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi pointed out that common differences in Bengali names such as “Roy” and “Ray” or the inclusion or omission of the middle name “Kumar” were triggering notices and objections. He remarked that the technology being used had created an administrative problem by ignoring ground realities.
“The programme used by the Election Commission has created a policy challenge without understanding how names are actually written and used in households,” Justice Bagchi noted.
The court’s intervention follows reports of widespread notices being issued to voters due to minor spelling variations and clerical inconsistencies, raising fears that eligible voters could be wrongly removed from electoral rolls. Petitioners argued that the current process risked disenfranchising large sections of the electorate ahead of upcoming elections.
By extending the deadline and increasing manpower at the district level, the court said it aimed to ensure that citizens receive a fair opportunity to correct errors and defend their voting rights. The bench also reiterated that the revision process must remain transparent and citizen-friendly.
The matter will be reviewed again by the court after the extended objection period, with further directions likely depending on how the Election Commission implements the revised instructions.
