NewKerala.com

ECI Questions Bengal Over Group-C Staff as Micro-Observers in Voter Roll Revision

The Election Commission of India has sent a fresh communication to the West Bengal government seeking clarification on the inclusion of Group-C state employees in a list submitted for deployment as micro-observers. The ECI notes that nearly 30% of the 8,505 names are Group-C staff incorrectly shown as Group-B officers based on enhanced pay. It also points out that around 500 officers from the list are already functioning as Assistant Electoral Registration Officers in the same revision exercise. With only 14 days remaining before the final voters' list is published, uncertainty looms over the deployment of these officers.

Key Points: ECI Questions Bengal Govt on Micro-Observer List

  • ECI questions Group-C staff as micro-observers
  • 30% of 8,505 names are Group-C employees
  • 500 officers already serve as AEROs
  • Uncertainty over deployment with 14 days left
2 min read

ECI questions Bengal govt over inclusion of Group-C staff as micro-observers

ECI seeks clarification from West Bengal over inclusion of Group-C staff as micro-observers in Supreme Court-directed electoral roll revision.

"The question is how enhanced pay can elevate the rank of these Group-C employees to that of Group-B officers. - CEO Office Source"

Kolkata, Feb 14

The Election Commission of India on Saturday sent a fresh communication to the West Bengal government seeking clarification over the inclusion of several Group-C state government employees in the list of 8,505 Group-B officers submitted by the state for deployment as micro-observers in the ongoing Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, as directed by the Supreme Court earlier this month.

"Almost 30 per cent of the 8,505 names in the list provided by the state government are actually Group-C employees. They have been shown as Group-B officers based on their recently enhanced pay. The question is how enhanced pay can elevate the rank of these Group-C employees to that of Group-B officers. Hence, a fresh communication has been sent to the state government seeking clarification on the matter," said a source in the office of the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO), West Bengal.

The source added that the Commission also pointed out that, of the 8,505 names submitted by the state government, around 500 officers are already functioning as Assistant Electoral Registration Officers (AEROs) in the voter revision exercise.

"This raises further questions, as these officers are already performing duties as AEROs. The rationale behind appointing them as micro-observers is unclear, given that the responsibilities of micro-observers differ from those of Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and AEROs," the CEO's office source said.

The source further said that due to ongoing uncertainty regarding the rank status of many officers included in the list submitted by the state government, it remains unclear whether they will be deployed in the revision exercise, particularly as only 14 days remain before the publication of the final voters' list, which will mark the conclusion of the revision process.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
With only 14 days left for the final list, such confusion is unacceptable. The state government should have been more diligent. The revision process must be above board, especially after Supreme Court directives. Hoping for a swift resolution.
R
Rohit P
This is a classic case of "jugaad" trying to become policy. You can't just promote someone on paper for a sensitive duty like this. The roles of AERO and micro-observer are distinct. The EC's scrutiny is necessary to prevent any malpractice.
S
Sarah B
While I understand the need for sufficient personnel, the process must be correct. If 500 are already AEROs, appointing them as micro-observers creates a conflict of interest. The EC is right to seek clarity. The integrity of the voter list is paramount.
V
Vikram M
As a citizen, I find this deeply concerning. The electoral roll is the foundation of our democracy. Any ambiguity in the officials managing it opens doors for disputes later. The state government must provide a satisfactory explanation immediately.
M
Michael C
Respectfully, I have to ask: could there be a genuine administrative error here? Submitting 8500+ names is a huge task. Maybe the pay grade update in the system caused a mix-up. The EC's query is standard procedure, but let's not assume malintent immediately.
K

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

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50