Duty of ECI to enable citizens to vote: Kerala HC slams poll body after duty officers allege they could not vote

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday took exception to the fact that around 20,000 persons engaged to carry out election duty in the State were not able to cast their votes [Kerala NGO Union v Election Commission of India and connected cases].

Justice KV Jayakumar expressed its dissatisfaction over the Election Commission of India's (ECI) reluctance to consider any solution to the issue.

"What is your instruction counsel (Election Commission). You have to give an opportunity. Why you are so adamant? Why you are adamant that you will not give opportunity," the Court demanded.

The judge reminded the poll body that its duty is to ensure that voters are able to exercise their right to vote.

"It is for you to ensure that every voter can exercise their right to vote. You are giving some advertisements that everyone has to vote, come and vote, so it is for you to do all these things. It's very unfortunate," the Court remarked.

It eventually did not pass any orders but deferred the matter.

The Court was hearing a batch of petitions alleging that thousands of government employees deployed for election duty were denied postal ballot during the recent 2026 assembly elections effectively depriving them of their right to vote.

The Court stressed that it is the Election Commission's responsibility to ensure such voters are not deprived of their right to vote.

"It is the duty of the Election Commission to render necessary facilities to all the citizens of India who are having vote, adult franchise, to ensure that they have voted. If they come with a complaint that they could not vote, it is for you to take necessary action and not Court. You ought not have waited for the Court's direction," the judge remarked.

During an earlier hearing, the Court had sought response from the ECI on whether such officials could still exercise their right to vote before the counting of votes started.

The Court today even suggested that a limited window could be considered for enabling voting for those whose postal ballot applications were admitted.

However, the Commission replied that it had already taken all necessary steps to ensure voting for all, adding that the petitioners should have raised their grievance through an election petition, instead of a writ petition.

The Commission also stated that the petitioners were negligent since the postal ballots applications were either not submitted or got rejected or were found defective.

The Court, however, questioned this stand and pointed out that the polling staff were appointed by the commission itself to carry out its work for the elections.

"You submit that these people (polling officers) were negligent and they are doing duty for you. Such persons are appointed by you for polling duty and they are doing work day and night for this," the Court orally remarked.

The Court said that the issue involves elements of public interest, affecting large number of people and it will look into the matter and assess whether judicial intervention is necessary.

One of the petitions was filed by the Kerala NGO Union, representing non-gazetted government officers deputed for election duty. Another plea was filed by the Joint Council of State Service Organisation of Government Employees representing over fifty thousand government employees of the state.

The petitions alleged that several government employees on election duty were not issued postal ballots despite applying within time, and hence, they should be allowed to vote even beyond the polling date.

The Court in an earlier interim order had emphasised that the right to vote cannot be denied even to polling officials and directed authorities to urgently facilitate issuance of postal ballots.

Despite this direction, petitioners alleged large-scale non-compliance. They claimed that nearly 6,000 officials did not receive ballot papers despite submitting applications within the prescribed time.

Further, many were unable to vote as the last date for postal voting lapsed while they were engaged in election duties, it was contended.

Apart from the voting issue, a connected grievance raised in the petitions concerned non-payment or partial payment of allowances to Booth Level Officers (BLO), who claimed that they were paid significantly less than the sanctioned amount for the electoral role revision work.

The Kerala NGO Union was represented by advocates Dinesh Mathew J Murikan, Vinod S Pillai, Nayana Varghese, Jerry Peter and Goutham Chandrasekhar.

The Joint Council of State Service Organisation was represented by advocates Aadithyan S Mannali and Ramola Nayanpally.

Standing counsel Deepu Lal Mohan appeared for the Election Commission of India.

[Read live coverage]