Will not allow impediments to SIR: Supreme Court directs WB DGP to answer ECI allegations against State
The Supreme Court on Monday directed the State of West Bengal to ensure that over 8,000 of its officers provided to the Election Commission of India (ECI) for duty relating to special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls report to the district electoral officers by Tuesday evening.
The bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice NV Anjaria also made it clear that it will issue directions to ensure smooth execution of the SIR and will not allow any impediments to the process.
"We will not allow any impediment in conduct of SIR. This must be clear to all States," CJI Kant said.
The Court made the observation after ECI made submissions stating that the State of West Bengal was not extending proper assistance to the electoral body. It took note of the ECI's allegations that the SIR was marred by violence, intimidation and sustained political interference.
The Bench reiterated that a categoric direction was issued to police to ensure maintenance of law and order and directed the West Bengal DGP to file a personal affidavit on the allegations against State.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union government, earlier submitted that a message must go that the Constitution applies to all. ECI also said that it has recommended suspension of certain officers but nothing has been done by the State government.
The Court then asked the State to take action.
"Please look into this. When suspension advise is given, I hope State knows what to do. We order that ECI shall be at liberty to replace officers who are not performing their duty," it said.
Meanwhile, the Court today directed that ECI shall have the discretion of utilizing the officers being provided by the State government, if found qualified.
"After briefly scrutinising their biodata, these State government officials may be imparted a brief training of a day or two so as to work as the micro observers," it added.
In an important clarification, the Court said that responsibility assigned to micro observers or the State government officials shall be to only assist the Electoral Registration Officers.
"ECI has clarified that micro observers are not the decision making authority and shall only assist the ERO," the Court recorded.
In another important development, the Court directed that the deadline for completion of SIR in West Bengal be extended by one week.
"Since new set of government officials have been inducted, the process of scrutinising documents submitted by affected persons is likely to take more time and as suggested on behalf of some of the petitioners, we direct that one week more time shall be granted beyond February 14 to the ERO to complete scrutiny and take a decision," the Bench ordered.
Meanwhile, during the hearing today, Justice Bagchi, flagged the widespread issuance of notices to people in West Bengal.
"You are saying 50 years is a grandparents age gap. This is how software is working, when marriages happens at 20. These are not ground realities," the judge said.
The Court also said that ECI had sent notice on to those who have 5-6 children. ECI claimed that 200 voters had traced their parentage to a single parent.
The judge said the ECI may be justified to issue notice in such cases but the electoral body had issued notices even over mere discrepancy of middle name.
"Yes if 50, yes send them a notice! The tools that you have applied to the software are very restrictive tools. Kumar is a middle name in Bengali households. You have Tapan Kumar Roy is there and now you have sent notices when name is Tapan Roy," Justice Bagchi said.
Last year, the ECI had held an SIR in Bihar ahead of the assembly polls there. Multiple petitions, including those filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and the National Federation for Indian Women (NFIW), challenged the legality of the process. However, the ECI proceeded with the SIR since the top court did not impose any stay on the same.
Subsequently, the ECI extended the SIR to other States and Union Territories, including West Bengal, Kerala and Tamil Nadu. This led to multiple petitions challenging the same. The Court reserved its decision on them on January 29.
Banerjee subsequently moved the Court challenging the ECI's decision to hold a SIR in the State and sought a direction that the polls be conducted on the basis of the existing rolls prepared last year. She has also sought an urgent direction to halt deletion of voters - particularly those under the “Logical Discrepancy” category, from the electoral rolls.
On February 4, Banerjee appeared in person before the Court and flagged various issues in the SIR. She alleged that the ECI targeted the state just ahead of the assembly elections this year.
"They only targeted Bengal on the eve of elections. What was the hurry? What takes two years is being done in three months even when festival, harvesting season is there," Banerjee added.
During the hearing, the Court asked the ECI to be careful while sending notices to voters on the basis of name mismatches.
Arguments Today
Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for the petitioners, submitted that 7.08 crore electors are on the draft list.
Out of them 6.75 crore are mapped, meaning that they were in 2002 list or identifiable by some member, Divan added. While 32 Lakh are unmapped, 1.36 crore were put in 'logical discrepancy', the Court was told.
"SIR is being conducted..this process ends on Feb 14. There is tremendous urgency for the reliefs which were sought," Divan said.
"More than 50 percent of 70 lakh is for minor name variations.. such as Dutta-Datta, Roy-Ray etc," he added.
However, the Court sought details about unavailability of the manpower. Divan said 8,500 more workers are proposed to be provided to the ECI by the State government.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the State, confirmed that the list has been prepared. However, the ECI said complete details of the officers were not provided.
CJI Kant said complete details including names should have been provided.
"Ideally, when a statement was made before us on February 4, it should have been done then itself. Only names will not do. They have to report to the district collector etc. You did not require any confirmation from the ECI," the Court said.
Singhvi responded that till Feb 4, 80,000 Block Level Officers (BLOs) and 8,524 Assistant Electoral Registration Officers (AEROs) are being given to the ECI. 294 Electoral Registration Officers (EROs), who are Group A officers, were also provided, the Court was told.
"Instead master craftsman, painters teachers not from Bengal, some PSI workers were deputed who had no knowledge of Bengal culture or work etc. They were the microobservers the person has to do the work of BLO. Our officers were trained. Here rank was also low," he added.
Senior Advocate DS Naidu for ECI said five letters were written to the State government seeking particular type of officers, who may have some experience in quasi-judicial decision making.
"They say officers worked in elections. But in SIR, they have to pass decisions which will be challenged in appellate forums. We need to know these 8,500 officers what work were they doing," Naidu said.
The Court said the AEROs being provided by State government can join tomorrow.
"Final yes or no decision is yet to be taken right. So if these officers join by tomorrow they can also give their opinion and then quality of decision by ERO will be more proper," CJI Kant said.
However, Naidu said they would have to be given some training. The Court said the ECI can examine the quality and experience of officers being provided and then take decision regarding experience.
"You see to what extent they are useful," CJI Kant said.
Naidu sought time to implement the Court's suggestion.
"We need to give them ID, software support etc. We can come day after tomorrow and submit to you.we can come back after 48 hours on their suitability," the senior counsel said.
Divan urged the Court to ensure that there is no mass disenfranchisement in West Bengal.
"February 14 is a final SIR list. It will be fait accompli. Once there is a final electoral list followed by notification for the assembly elections, that is the end of the story. There cannot be mass exclusion and a purging of names," the senior counsel said.
Divan further said that there were general instructions for rejection of names.
"Reasons for rejection.. only Aadhaar and so called family register. The general direction is to reject. Now see Aadhaar and admit card submitted.. now general instruction is that no document linking with parent is doubtful and should be rejected. Name mismatch with no other document name rejected. Even if they have two documents names are rejected. This is wholesale general instructions. The idea appears to be mass exclude (sic)," he said.
Divan added that ERO should be the final authority on objections.
"This entire powerpoint presentation was given by ECI on Whatsapp to its officials on January 23!! Now see the extra legal role being given to the micro observers. Even though ERO and AERO finds its okay, it is the micro observer who is playing they key role. There needs to be a direction that ERO has to be the final authority who takes a decision," the senior counsel submitted.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan said 1.36 crores have been excluded and the final list cannot be published on Feb 14.
"Else it will be a fait accompli," Sankaranarayanan added.
Meanwhile, Senior Advocate VV Giri, appearing for a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petitioner, highlighted instances of violence in West Bengal.
"There have wholesale burning of form 7 objection forms. We have prayed for extension to submit objections since most of it were burnt," Giri said.
At this stage, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta also appeared in the hearing via video conferencing. He asked the Court to go through the affidavit filed by ECI.
"One constitutional body is threatening the Election Commission of India. Any directions can be passed to remedy the situation. Violence is being instigated by leader. Please go through the affidavit. A message has to go that Constitution applies to all States," Mehta said.