The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed petitioners 10 days to respond to the Election Commission’s affidavit defending the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The Commission has maintained that the exercise was legally authorised and that its three members unanimously approved the relevant decisions.
A three-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana also sought responses from the Election Commission and other parties on a separate petition alleging unauthorised changes to the voter registration process during the Bihar SIR.
The fresh petition, filed by Rajya Sabha MP Dola Sen, challenges alleged modifications to Form 6, which is used for voter registration. Senior advocate and MP Maneka Guruswamy, representing Sen, disputed the Commission’s assertion that the Supreme Court had approved the changes.
Issuing notice on the petition, CJI Surya Kant said the Court would examine all the issues raised.
The Bench also directed senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the first petitioner, Rakesh Kumar Singh, to submit a rejoinder within 10 days to the Election Commission’s affidavit, which was filed late on Monday evening.
Election Commission Rejects Allegations of Unauthorised Decisions
In its 248-page affidavit, the Election Commission rejected allegations concerning the conduct of the SIR and decisions attributed to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
The Commission maintained that the statutory Form 6 had not been amended, contrary to the allegations raised in the petitions.
Deputy Election Commissioner Bhanu Prakash Yeturu, who filed the affidavit on behalf of the Commission, stated that the allegations casting doubt on the poll panel were unfortunate.
The Commission further asserted that all three members had unanimously approved the filing of the affidavit. It also maintained that the relevant SIR orders and decisions had received unanimous approval.
Dispute Over Election Commissioners’ Objections
The litigation follows a September 25 media report alleging differences within the Election Commission over decisions relating to the SIR.
According to the report, Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded objections on at least 14 occasions during the preceding 10 months. Their objections reportedly concerned SIR-related orders and decisions issued without their knowledge or recommendation.
The allegations subsequently triggered protests by opposition parties and the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), which demanded the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
The Supreme Court will examine the competing claims after the petitioners file their responses to the Election Commission’s affidavit.
