Bengal SIR Battle: TMC's Supreme Court Challenge Over Voter List

The Trinamool Congress is taking its fight against the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision to the Supreme Court. They're challenging the use of a 2002 voter list that doesn't account for constituency changes after the 2008 delimitation. The party also questions why voters who cast ballots in the 2024 elections are now being asked to reapply. With deadlines already being missed, this legal battle could significantly impact Bengal's electoral preparations.

Key Points: TMC Challenges Election Commission SIR Process in Supreme Court

  • TMC questions ECI using 2002 voter list despite 2008 delimitation changes
  • Party challenges deletion of voters who participated in 2024 elections
  • Supreme Court petition seeks stay on ongoing SIR process in Bengal
  • ECI misses November 11 deadline with 15% forms still pending
2 min read

SIR in Bengal: TMC to raise two questions in Supreme Court

TMC questions ECI's use of 2002 voter list basis and deletion of 2024 voters in Supreme Court petition against Bengal SIR exercise.

"How could those non-existent Assembly constituencies be the basis of the current revision exercise? - Kalyan Banerjee"

Kolkata, Nov 12

Trinamool Congress, during the hearing later this month on its petition filed at the Supreme Court against the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) by the Election Commission of India (ECI) in West Bengal, will raise two questions on the procedure followed in the current revision exercise.

Speaking to media persons on Wednesday, four-time Trinamool Congress Lok Sabha MP and senior advocate of the Calcutta High Court Kalyan Banerjee said that the Commission's decision to accept the 2002 voters list as the basis of the current exercise is not acceptable, since following the delimitation exercise which was completed in 2008, there had been a major change in the layout of the Lok Sabha and Assembly constituencies have changed.

"Many constituencies that used to exist in 2002, when the last SIR was conducted, ceased to exist after the delimitation. Similarly, after delimitation, some new constituencies were formed that did not exist before. So how could those non-existent Assembly constituencies be the basis of the current revision exercise? That would be our first point of argument during the hearing in the matter at the apex court," Kalyan Banerjee said.

The second point to be raised by Trinamool Congress during the apex court hearing, according to Banerjee, would be how the Commission could delete the names of certain voters in the state or ask them to make fresh applications when they had already voted in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections.

In its petition at the apex court, Trinamool Congress's main demand is to seek a stay on the ongoing SIR process.

When asked whether the court could stay a decision of a constitutional body like ECI, Kalyan Banerjee said that at least the apex court could give valuable guidance regarding changes in the procedures of the current revision exercise.

Meanwhile, November 14 had been scheduled as the fresh deadline for completing the process of distribution of enumeration forms in the state. The earlier deadline of November 11 had already expired on Tuesday, with the distribution of enumeration forms yet to be completed for around 15 per cent of voters.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

R
Rohit P
This is pure political drama before elections. If people voted in 2024 elections, why delete their names now? ECI should explain this properly to avoid confusion among voters.
J
James A
As an observer of Indian politics, this seems like a legitimate constitutional question. The Supreme Court's guidance could set important precedents for electoral processes across India.
S
Sarah B
While I understand TMC's concerns, approaching courts for every electoral process creates unnecessary delays. Political parties should work with ECI to resolve issues rather than rushing to judiciary.
A
Arjun K
The deadline extension from Nov 11 to 14 shows the practical difficulties in this exercise. Common voters like us get caught in these administrative issues. Hope SC gives clear directions.
K
Kavya N
Both points raised by TMC are valid. How can non-existent constituencies be the basis? And why delete names of people who voted recently? This needs proper clarification from ECI. 🤔

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

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50