West Bengal SIR | SC notes disposal of over 47 lakh objections

Exercise on track, says Court

At the outset, CJI Surya Kant stated that the Court was “quite happy and optimistic about the facts and figures” provided by the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court. The High Court had indicated that about 1.75–2 lakh objections are being dealt with every day.

Tribunals ready to begin functioning

The Court noted that the Election Commission of India (ECI) had notified 19 appellate tribunals based on the Court’s March Order directing the creation of an adjudicatory framework to address claims and objections arising out of the SIR exercise. Senior Advocate D.S. Naidu, appearing for the ECI, submitted that training was being imparted to the judicial officers.[WHOM]. 

Senior Advocate Kalyan Banerjee questioned the need for training, submitting that appellate tribunals are quasi-judicial bodies. CJI Surya Kant described it as a “frivolous objection” and stated that it was “only orientation”. Justice Bagchi added, “They have past experience. You do not have to be bothered about ECI officials interfering.”

No intervention on Form 6 issue

Banerjee submitted that despite earlier directions, the ECI had issued a notification extending the time for filing Form 6 applications. He argued that “form 6 cannot be done at this stage when adjudication proceedings are going on.” Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal added that “bundles, thousands of forms are being filed”.

CJI Surya Kant, however, declined to intervene, stating, “There is nothing before us in writing… All arguments being made orally.” He added, “Ultimately, you are not remediless,” and asked counsel to raise such issues before the appellate tribunals.  

Court declines to examine exclusion data

Senior Advocate Shyam Divan submitted that the “degree of inclusion was 55%…45% excluded”, calling it a “very high rate”, pointing to the likely burden on tribunals. CJI Surya Kant declined to comment, stating, “We will not comment on this… this becomes a contentious issue.”

During this exchange, Justice Bagchi clarified, “One is amendment of electoral roll, one is electoral roll which goes for polls…a person can be included in rolls by filing Form 6,” indicating the distinction between the two stages.

Framework for appeals clarified

The Court recorded Naidu’s submission that appellate tribunals will have access to the records and reasons for inclusion or exclusion. Taking note of this, the Court directed that appellate tribunals must have full access to the reports and reasons recorded by judicial officers. It further indicated that parties should be provided access to such reasons in appellate proceedings.

Setting out the framework, CJI Surya Kant observed that appellate tribunals “can form their own procedure by following principles of natural justice.” He added that tribunals should not entertain fresh documents that were not placed before the adjudicating officer without verifying their genuineness, later clarifying that such documents should not be taken on record “without verifying genuineness of such documents.”

Payments to be released without delay

The Court addressed logistical concerns flagged by the High Court, including non-payment of honorarium and expenses.

Recording a communication placed on record, the Court directed the ECI and the Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal, to make necessary payments to the adjudicating officer, the appellate tribunal members and the allied staff and to release payments in accordance with recommendations so that the process is not delayed.

The matter is now listed on 6 April.