SC Orders Transparency in Bengal Voter List, TMC Hails "Big Slap" to ECI

The Supreme Court has directed the Election Commission of India to publicly display the names of voters flagged under 'logical discrepancies' during West Bengal's Special Intensive Revision. Trinamool Congress MP Kalyan Banerjee welcomed the order, stating the court demands transparency and will intervene if the process remains opaque. The court's directions include a streamlined hearing process for affected persons and the acceptance of admit cards as valid documents. TMC MP Kakoli Ghosh Dastidar hailed the verdict as a "big slap" on the ECI's actions, which the party alleges were influenced by the BJP.

Key Points: SC Directs ECI on Bengal Voter List, TMC Welcomes Order

  • SC orders public display of voter discrepancy list
  • Hearing process must be completed within 10 days
  • Voters can submit documents and take legal help
  • TMC calls verdict a "big slap" on ECI
  • Final electoral roll to be published in Feb 2026
3 min read

"Court wants transparency": TMC MP Kalyan Banerjee welcomes SC's directions to ECI for Bengal SIR

Supreme Court orders ECI to display 'logical discrepancies' list in Bengal voter revision. TMC MPs hail verdict, call it a check on poll body's "atrocities."

"Court wants transparency; if something is not transparent, the court will interfere. - Kalyan Banerjee"

New Delhi, January 19

Trinamool Congress MP Kalyan Banerjee on Monday welcomed the Supreme Court's decision directing the Election Commission of India to display the names of the electors falling under the 'logical discrepancies' category in the ongoing Special Intensive Revision drive in West Bengal.

Speaking to reporters outside the apex court, Banerjee, who is also a Senior Advocate, said the court wants transparency in the SIR exercise and will "interfere" if the process remains opaque.

He said, "The Supreme Court has directed the Election Commission to publish the list of 'logical discrepancies' at Gram Panchayat Bhavans and Block Offices. There should be transparency, and it should be published. Three days after publication of the list, the Election Commission will issue a notice of hearing, which must be completed within 10 days. The BLA-2 was not allowed to assist, but the SC said that they can take assistance from any person or lawyer."

"At the time of the hearing, they have to note the documents that have been submitted before the election officer. We said that the hearing should take place in the Panchayat or Block area. The Supreme Court asked the Election Commission to accept the Admit Card. If they do not, we will inform the court at the next hearing. Court wants transparency; if something is not transparent, the court will interfere," he added while discussing the decision by the three-judge bench led by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant.

Earlier today, a three-judge bench led by CJI Surya Kant issued directions to the ECI on various pleas alleging procedural illegalities in the SIR exercise in West Bengal.

The apex court noted that the ECI has issued notices to certain persons described as falling under the 'logical discrepancies' category. Thus, with a view to enabling persons included in the category, the Court issued a direction to display the names of such persons at Gram Panchayat Bhavans, Block Offices, and Ward Offices.

The court asked the state government to provide adequate manpower to the ECI and the State Election Commission to entertain the documents and objections and to adhere to the hearing process for persons likely to be affected. In this regard, directions shall be issued by the ECI/State Government for the deployment of adequate personnel.

Persons likely to be affected shall be permitted to submit their documents before the authorised officers. The apex court instructed that an authority letter be issued in this regard. The bench instructed the persons in the category who have not submitted their claims and objections to do so within 10 days.

TMC MP Kakoli Ghosh Dastidar called the decision a "big slap" over the "atrocities" committed by the poll body.

"This is a big slap on the atrocities that the ECI was committing on the people of West Bengal at the instructions of the BJP. We welcome the verdict of the Supreme Court and thank the court for its judgment," she said.

The Electoral Roll Officers' Network (ERONET) portal had flagged more than 1.2 crore names under the 'logical discrepancy' category, sparking a fresh row over the SIR exercise in the state. Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee had called it a "dubious" category.

The deadline to file claims and objections (new voter name additions via Form 6, deletions via Form 7, and corrections via Form 8) was extended from January 15 to January 19, giving voters extra time to submit their applications. Hearings on these claims and objections will continue up to February 7, 2026. The Final electoral roll for West Bengal will be published on February 14, 2026.

- ANI

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
Finally some sense prevails! The ECI's process seemed very opaque and rushed. How can so many names have "logical discrepancies"? This directive to display lists at Panchayat offices will help common people, especially the elderly, check if their name is wrongly listed. Good step.
R
Rohit P
While transparency is good, calling it a "big slap" is too much political drama. The court is just ensuring due process. Both TMC and BJP will try to spin this for votes. As a citizen, I just want a clean voter list without any party's interference.
S
Sarah B
The timeline is very tight - 10 days to submit claims after the list is published. I hope the "adequate manpower" direction is followed properly. In many villages, people might not check the notice boards regularly. There should be wider awareness via SMS or local announcements too.
V
Vikram M
The SC's direction to allow assistance from any person or lawyer is crucial. Many people are not literate enough to navigate legal objections. This will empower them. The election process must be inclusive, not a bureaucratic hurdle.
K
Karthik V
Respectfully, I think the court's intervention, while necessary, points to a deeper failure. Why does the Election Commission, a constitutional body meant to be independent, need judicial supervision for a basic revision exercise? This erodes trust in our institutions. We need systemic reform.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50