Plea in Karnataka HC challenges State Election Commission's parallel SIR for Greater Bengaluru

A petition has been filed before the Karnataka High Court challenging the Karnataka State Election Commission's (KSEC) decision to undertake a separate Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls for select Greater Bengaluru Authority wards while the Election Commission of India (ECI) is already conducting a nationwide revision.

The petition has been filed by Bengaluru residents M Vivek, M Srinath, ST Manjunatha, TR Satish and KR Anand Murthy.

The KSEC, the State Government and the ECI have been arrayed as respondents.

The petitioners have contended that the ECI launched a nationwide SIR of electoral rolls, with Karnataka placed in Phase III.

Under the ECI's notified schedule, the assembly constituency electoral rolls were frozen as on June 16 and the revision process is scheduled to culminate with the final publication of rolls on October 7.

However, the plea states that just three days later, on June 19, the Karnataka State Election Commission issued an order directing a separate and parallel SIR for specified Greater Bengaluru Authority wards.

According to the petition, the KSEC independently froze the electoral rolls as on April 18, 2026, and fixed a compressed five-week schedule ending on July 31, 2026, citing unspecified complaints from local political parties.

The petition argues that the State Election Commission's decision has resulted in two simultaneous revision exercises for the same electorate, with different freeze dates, qualifying dates and overlapping field operations in the same households, leading to voter confusion and duplication of work.

It has further contended that the Greater Bengaluru Governance (Registration of Electors) Rules, 2025, particularly Rules 3 and 30, require the State Election Commission to adopt the Assembly electoral rolls prepared by the ECI and do not authorise it to conduct an independent SIR.

The petition also asserts that Article 243ZA of the Constitution empowers the State Election Commission only to exercise superintendence over the preparation of electoral rolls for local body elections by adopting the assembly rolls, and does not confer authority to undertake an independent revision.

It further challenges Section 35 of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act to the extent it may be interpreted as conferring such power. Such a reading would be ultra vires Articles 243ZA, 325 and 326 of the Constitution, which envisage a single, unified electoral roll, the plea has contended.

The petition additionally alleges that the order is arbitrary, unreasoned, hastily issued and results in an unnecessary expenditure of public resources by requiring duplicate deployment of Booth Level Officers (BLOs) and Booth Level Agents (BLAs).

The matter is yet to be listed for hearing.

The petition was filed through advocate Venkatesh Dalawai.