West Bengal SIR | SC directs ECI to disclose status of pending appeals

38.1 lakh appeals, but only 7 lakh by deleted voters

Senior Advocate Kalyan Bandopadhyay, appearing for the petitioners, said data on the number of appeals pending and decided by the tribunals was not in the public domain. Referring to 31 Assembly constituencies where the number of deleted voters exceeded the margin of victory, he requested the Court to seek data on the number of appeals filed and disposed of. Justice Bagchi asked how many of those deleted had filed appeals, observing that if the number was not significant, the comparison with election margins could become academic. Bandopadhyay pointed to the upcoming municipal and panchayat elections, saying voters whose names had been deleted would be unable to vote.

CJI Surya Kant said the Court would not confine its examination to the 31 constituencies. “Our concern will be about all,” he said. He added that appeals had to be adjudicated in a time-bound manner and that additional tribunals could be appointed if necessary.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan referred to an RTI response given to a Member of Parliament. He submitted that 38.1 lakh appeals had been filed before the tribunals, of which around 83,000 had been decided. Approximately 75,000 voters had been included in the electoral rolls following those decisions, he said. Referring to Jalpaiguri, Sankaranarayanan said 665 voters had been included and none excluded. He submitted that only around 7 lakh of the 38.1 lakh appeals had been filed by individuals whose names were deleted. The remaining appeals, he said, had been filed by the Election Commission of India (ECI) or by objectors challenging inclusions.

Sankaranarayanan argued that the 7 lakh appeals should be prioritised, referring to the Court’s 10 March order which stated that appeals by excluded voters should be expedited.  Appeals challenging inclusions, he submitted, already had a remedy under the Representation of People Act, 1950. Bandopadhyay added that there was no information in the public domain on the outcome of the seven lakh appeals.

Justice Bagchi said exclusion from the electoral roll amounted to “denuding a voting right” and required prioritisation. Senior Advocate Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya also submitted that appeals against exclusion should be considered first.

ECI seeks 10 days to collate information

Senior Advocate D.S. Naidu, appearing for the ECI, said ECI officials had met members of the tribunals. Justice Bagchi suggested that the Acting Chief Justice could facilitate meetings with tribunal members, who sometimes faced difficulties in issuing notices. The CJI asked how many additional tribunals would be required to dispose of the appeals within a reasonable time. 

When Naidu agreed that additional tribunals were required, Sankaranarayanan objected, saying there was no need to burden the system with more tribunals. The existing tribunals should instead prioritise appeals filed by deleted voters, he stated. Naidu submitted that the ECI had another meeting scheduled and sought 10 days to collate the information.

The Court directed the ECI to file a reply stating the number of pending appeals and to segregate them according to whether they were filed by excluded voters, those challenging inclusions or in cross-appeals. The ECI was asked to explain how many additional tribunals are required.

Priority sought for Kolkata, Howrah voters

Sankaranarayanan said the Kolkata and Howrah Municipal Corporation elections were due in December and suggested that appeals involving voters in those areas be prioritised. Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy said the affected voters had already lost their right once and should not have to lose it again. 

Counsel also referred to alleged consequences of deletion beyond voting, including stoppage of access to the public distribution system and difficulty obtaining domicile certificates. One submission concerned a NEET rank holder who was allegedly unable to obtain a domicile certificate. The CJI asked them to confine submissions to the issues before the Court, but said the Court could make an observation that deletion from the electoral rolls should not have such “ripple effects.”