The Supreme Court on Monday said it would not allow any impediment to the special intensive revision of electoral rolls and extended by one week the deadline for publication of the final voter list in West Bengal. The earlier deadline was February 14.

The court said additional time was required for scrutiny of documents submitted in response to notices issued during the SIR of electoral rolls.

“Since the process of scrutinising documents submitted by affected persons in response to notices is likely to take more time, and as suggested on behalf of some of the petitioners, we direct that at least one week beyond 14 February be granted to electoral registration officers for completing scrutiny of documents and taking an appropriate decision,” the court said, as quoted by Live Law.

The court heard the Election Commission’s response to a petition filed by West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, which challenged the SIR exercise in the state.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi heard the matter.

Notice issued to Bengal DGP

The Supreme Court also issued a show-cause notice to the West Bengal Director General of Police. In an earlier order dated 19 January, the court directed state police to maintain law and order and assist the Election Commission in carrying out the revision process.

The court asked the DGP to file a personal affidavit explaining his conduct and to respond to allegations that action was not taken on complaints made by the Election Commission regarding vandalism.

Referring to submissions made by the petitioners and the Election Commission, the court said it had been alleged that despite complaints, no FIRs were registered in connection with the burning of records or other alleged unlawful activities. The state denied these allegations.

“On behalf of petitioners, reference has been made to the role of micro observers… ECI has clarified that micro observers and/or state government officials shall only assist the prescribed statutory authority in taking the final decision. It is alleged that despite complaints by ECI, no FIR was being registered against persons suspected of burning records of objections or other alleged unlawful activities,” the court said, as quoted by Live Law.

It added, “Though this is strongly refuted by the state, we are reminded of our 19 January order, in which a categorical direction was issued to police authorities to ensure maintenance of law and order. DGP to file personal affidavit in response to allegations by ECI.”

The court added that electoral registration officers must consider all objections received in accordance with statutory provisions, irrespective of whether individuals appear for personal hearings, and verify the genuineness of documents submitted.

Court’s direction on SIR process

Chief Justice Surya Kant said the court would issue any further directions or clarifications required but would not permit obstruction to the SIR exercise.

“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,” he said.

The Chief Justice noted that 8,500 officers have been deployed for the exercise and said earlier deployment could have aided approval.

Submissions by Bengal government

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the West Bengal government, said the Election Commission had not requested Group-B officers and had not made any such request to the state.

The Bengal Chief Minister had raised concerns before the court regarding a list of 13.6 million voters placed under scrutiny, saying they risked deletion due to discrepancies such as spelling variations in surnames or changes in addresses after marriage.

She also referred to the deployment of more than 8,000 micro-observers by the Election Commission, stating they were central government officers and alleging that voter names were being removed without authority.