West Bengal SIR: SC orders to deploy judicial officers for ERO duty amid state–ECI rift

New Delhi: In a major ruling, the Supreme Court on Friday directed that judicial officers be appointed to adjudicate claims and objections arising from the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal, noting a “trust deficit” between the State Government and the Election Commission of India (ECI).

According to the Court’s direction, these judicial officers will carry out the functions of Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) during the process. The move follows a dispute over whether the State had provided an adequate number of Group B officers of SDM rank to act as EROs. The State objected to the ECI’s reliance on micro-observers and special roll observers appointed by it.

In its order, the bench referred to “an unfortunate blame game” marked by “allegations and counter-allegations,” observing that this reflected a “trust deficit between two Constitutional bodies, namely the democratically elected State Government and the Election Commission of India.”

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi observed:

“In order to ensure fairness in the adjudication of the genuineness of the documents and consequential inclusion/exclusion in voters list, and as agreed to by both sides, we are left with hardly any other option but to request the hon'ble Chief Justice of the High Court of Calcutta to spare serving judicial officers along with some former judicial officers in the rank of Addl District Judge or District Judges who can then be requested to revisit/dispose of the pending claims under the category of 'logical discrepancy'. Each such judicial officer/former judicial officer shall be assisted by micro observers from the ECI and officers from the State Government who have already been deployed for such duties.

The circumstances being extraordinary, the entrustment to judicial officers/former judicial officers is also extra ordinary. We are also conscisous of the fact that this may also have impact on the pending court cases also. The Chief Justice, with the assistance of the Committee of Registrar General and District Judges, may evovle some interim arrangement for the shifting of matters requiring urgent relief to alternate courts."

The Court permitted publication of the final voters list, where the process has been completed, on the scheduled date of February 28, and allowed the ECI to issue supplementary lists thereafter.

It also directed the Collector and Superintendent of Police to extend full logistical support to the judicial officers and their teams to ensure smooth completion of the pending process. Both officials will be deemed to be on deputation for the purpose of complying with directions issued from time to time. Additionally, the Director General of Police has been asked to file a supplementary affidavit detailing steps taken in response to complaints about threats to SIR officers.

At the start of the hearing, both the State and the ECI accused each other of failing to comply with earlier Court directions requiring the State to provide sufficient Group B officers for SIR duties.

Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Menaka Guruswamy, appearing for the State, argued that Group B officers had been made available. Senior Advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, representing the ECI, contended that SDM-rank officers competent to pass quasi-judicial orders had not been provided.

Sibal maintained that SDM is a Group A post in the State and argued that such officers were not required to replace the ECI’s micro-observers, since the Court had already clarified that micro-observers cannot pass final orders.

The bench, however, expressed dissatisfaction with the State’s stance, observing that officers were needed to function as EROs. The Chief Justice remarked that the Court had expected cooperation from the State.

Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, submitted that after the Court restrained micro-observers from passing orders, the ECI introduced a new category of “Special Roll Officers” to scrutinise files cleared by EROs. He argued that such officers could not override ERO decisions. Naidu rejected this contention, stating that Special Roll Observers had been in place from the beginning. He further submitted that the ECI had not faced similar challenges in any other state.

Expressing concern over the ongoing friction, the bench indicated that it would involve the State judiciary to ensure the SIR process is completed. Justice Bagchi noted that given the hesitation on both sides, judicial officers would be appointed. Both parties accepted the proposal.

(With Live Law inputs)