SC seeks same-day report from Calcutta HC CJ on Bengal SIR tribunals

Top court flags issues in functioning of appellate tribunals on voter roll revisions in West Bengal, seeks immediate report and urges expedited hearing in exclusion case

The Supreme Court on Monday indicated that it would immediately call for a report from the chief justice of the Calcutta High Court regarding the functioning of appellate tribunals set up to examine challenges to inclusions and exclusions in West Bengal’s electoral roll following the Special Intensive Revision (SIR).

 

The submission was made during an oral mentioning before a Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi.

 

Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat said the tribunals were effectively non-functional despite earlier directions of the court. He alleged that advocates were not being permitted to appear for parties and that only online applications were being accepted, creating barriers for affected individuals.

 

 

Referring to the court’s earlier order allowing individuals whose appeals are accepted shortly before polling to cast their votes, Kamat argued that these directions were not being implemented in practice. He pointed to media reports to support his claim that the tribunals were not operating as required.

 

The Bench expressed concern over the repeated mentions in the matter, with the chief justice remarking on the frequency of applications being filed. In response to the grievances raised, the court stated that it would obtain a report from the chief justice of the Calcutta High Court on the issue the same day.

Priority hearing for woman dropped from voter list

The apex court also urged an appellate tribunal in West Bengal to prioritise the appeal of a woman whose name was struck off the electoral roll following the SIR. 

The court issued the request after hearing Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat, appearing for the petitioner. 

Challenging a March 27 order passed by a judicial officer, Farasat argued that the petitioner held a valid passport, was included in the 2002 electoral roll, and had been voting since then. He clarified that the relief sought was limited to an expedited hearing, given that the revision exercise was set to conclude on April 27.

 

When the Bench asked whether the tribunal had already been approached, Farasat responded, “Yes, I filed on April 3 ... but unfortunately, I have not got a hearing. I just want that liberty (out-of-turn hearing) and I will move the forum.”

 

Recording this, the court observed: “The petitioner has already approached the Appellate Tribunal on 3rd April being aggrieved by her exclusion [after] the SIR process. We request the Appellate Tribunal to accord an out-of-turn hearing to the petitioner's appeal at the earliest.”

 

The petitioner sought parity with an earlier order dated April 13, when the court had allowed another litigant to seek an urgent hearing before the tribunal in similar circumstances.