"Won't Allow Any Impediment To SIR Process," Supreme Court Warns States

The Supreme Court today delivered a strong message to all state governments: the process of Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls cannot be obstructed. The top court also extended the deadline for SIR in West Bengal by one more week, from February 14

"Whatever orders or clarification required, we will issue. But we will not allow any impediment to the SIR process. This must be understood by all states," Chief Justice Surya Kant said during proceedings.

The observation came as the court heard the Election Commission's (EC) response to a petition filed by West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee challenging the SIR exercise in the state.

The case is being heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M Pancholi.

At the heart of the dispute is the Election Commission's special intensive revision of electoral rolls in West Bengal, an exercise that the state government has questioned. Mamata Banerjee has approached the court alleging irregularities in the process and questioning the deployment of thousands of micro-observers in the state.

The Election Commission, in turn, has defended its actions and accused the state government of failing to cooperate fully with its requests.

During the hearing, the Chief Justice remarked that 8,500 officers have now been deployed in connection with the exercise.

"If done earlier, it would probably get approved," he said, in what appeared to be a reference to the timing of compliance by the state government.

The court questioned why there had been a delay in sending the names of more than 8,000 Group B officers to be used in place of micro-observers.

"Why delay in sending names of more than 8,000 Group B officers to be used in place of micro-observers," the Supreme Court asked the West Bengal government.

The Chief Justice also directly questioned the timing of the state's communication. Addressing Mamata Banerjee, he asked: "Why you are sending names on 12 am on February 7 on mail when we gave directions on February 4?"

A central point of contention in the case has been the deployment of micro-observers in West Bengal. The Election Commission told the court that it had written five letters to the West Bengal government specifying the officers it required.

"They have not given," the poll body said, explaining why micro-observers were deployed.

According to the poll body, particulars and details of officers sought were not shared by the state government. The Election Commission maintained that its actions were necessitated by the lack of response and that the deployment of micro-observers was within its constitutional authority to ensure the integrity of the revision process.

"On February 4, Ms Mamata Banerjee appeared along with her counsels. There was an objection raised on the deployment of micro observers by the ECI, and it was stated by ECI that despite repeated requests, adequate manpower was not provided by the state government. On this, Chief Minister Banerjee made a statement that she was willing to provide state government officers who are competent enough to perform these duties. We have been shown that on February 7, the AoR informed senior counsels of ECI at 11:57 am that the state is ready to provide 8,505 officers for the SIR exercise," the court's order read. 

Bengal's Counter

Appearing for the West Bengal government, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi disputed the Election Commission's version. He told the court that the Election Commission had never requested Group-B officers nor made any such request to the state.

Shyam Diwan, appearing for Mamata Banerjee, countered the Commission's claims by stating that names were ready and compiled and had been sent to the poll panel.

The divergence in accounts reflects the broader friction between the state government and the Election Commission over both the manner and substance of the SIR exercise.