SC seeks EC reply on pleas challenging SIR in Tamil Nadu, West Bengal

The Supreme Court asked high courts in Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Puducherry and Bihar to pause hearings on voter list pleas till it decides the matter; next hearing is on November 26

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued a notice to the Election Commission over multiple petitions challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Tamil Nadu, Puducherry, and West Bengal, LiveLaw reported.

 

A Bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi directed that all related petitions pending before the High Courts of these states, as well as Bihar, be kept in abeyance until the Supreme Court takes a final view. The case will next be heard on November 26.

 

The petitions before the apex court have been filed by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), the Communist Party of India (Marxist), Mostari Banu of Congress and Dola Sen of the All India Trinamool Congress, among others.

 

Kapil Sibal questions timing of revision

 

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for DMK’s RS Bharati, argued that the Election Commission's decision to hold a uniform SIR across several states was unreasonable, particularly for Tamil Nadu. He pointed out that the November-January period coincides with monsoon and festive seasons in the state. 

 

“November-December is the time of heavy rains in Tamil Nadu, and most officers might be engaged in flood relief work. In December, people travel during Christmas vacations, and January is the Pongal harvest season. This period is the most unsuitable to hold SIR in Tamil Nadu,” Sibal said.

 

He also said that the poll panel's October 27 order differed from its earlier June order by allowing documents to be submitted only after the draft list is published, and only if the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) asks for them. Justice Kant responded, “So whatever deficiency was there, they have cured.”   

 

Bench emphasises trust in Election Commission

 

The Bench observed that as a constitutional authority, the Election Commission should be trusted to carry out the exercise properly. “A constitutional authority is doing this. Anybody can commit procedural deficiencies. Point out, they will rectify,” Justice Kant said.

 

Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, representing the poll panel, commented that “states were competing to show who was more backward". He urged the apex court to direct high courts not to entertain similar petitions to avoid conflicting orders. The Bench agreed.

 

Tamil Nadu, West Bengal file petitions

 

In Tamil Nadu, the DMK’s petition states that an earlier Special Summary Revision (SSR) had already been conducted between October 2024 and January 2025 and the rolls were regularly updated thereafter.

 

Despite this, the Election Commission launched a fresh SIR with citizenship verification requirements, particularly targeting those not listed in the 2003 rolls. The DMK alleges that this transforms the poll panel into a “de facto National Register of Citizens (NRC)", exceeding its constitutional powers.

 

In West Bengal, the revision drive has been challenged by Trinamool Congress MP Dola Sen and the West Bengal Congress Committee, who have raised similar concerns about the legality and timing of the Election Commission's process.