The Supreme Court asked the Election Commission of India (ECI) to respond to petitions filed by Trinamool Congress MPs seeking an extension of the January 15 deadline for submitting claims and objections during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justice Joymalya Bagchi, was hearing applications moved by MPs Derek O’Brien and Dola Sen. The petitions flagged alleged procedural lapses in the revision exercise being conducted in the Trinamool-ruled state.
During the proceedings, counsel for the ECI sought two weeks to file its reply. The court, however, granted the poll body one week to submit a counter-affidavit and directed that a common response be filed for both applications. The matter has been listed for further hearing next Monday.
Earlier, Derek O’Brien had approached the apex court seeking urgent intervention, alleging large-scale irregularities, arbitrary decision-making and an “unreasonably short” timeline for the electoral roll revision.
In his interlocutory plea, O’Brien sought an extension of the January 15 deadline, arguing that the publication of the draft electoral roll on December 16, 2025 had worsened the difficulties faced by eligible voters. The application claimed that around 58.2 lakh names were removed from the draft roll without prior notice or personal hearings, allegedly in violation of statutory provisions and the ECI’s own Standard Operating Procedures.
It further pointed to a sharp drop in the electorate from 7.66 crore to 7.08 crore voters alleging that the deletions were carried out through centralised, software-driven processes without adequate involvement of Electoral Registration Officers (EROs).
Raising concerns over the manner in which instructions were issued, the plea alleged that more than 50 directions were communicated informally through WhatsApp messages and oral instructions. It claimed the ECI had effectively replaced formal statutory communication with what was described as a “WhatsApp Commission”.
According to the application, such informal directives lack legal validity, transparency and accountability, and undermine a process that directly affects citizens’ voting rights. It argued that substituting legally mandated procedures with ad hoc mechanisms has caused administrative confusion and compromised procedural fairness.
The plea also challenged the introduction of an extra-statutory category called “logical discrepancies”, under which over 1.3 crore voters are allegedly being flagged for hearings without any written orders, published guidelines or statutory backing. It claimed these discrepancies are generated through undisclosed algorithms and disproportionately impact women and minority voters due to spelling variations and surname changes after marriage.
Highlighting the difficulties faced by senior citizens, persons with disabilities and migrant workers, the application said mandatory physical hearings place an undue burden on vulnerable groups and risk their disenfranchisement.
The petition sought an extension of the January 15 deadline, a halt to informal instructions, withdrawal of the “logical discrepancy” category, restoration of the statutory role of EROs, and postponement of the publication of the final electoral roll scheduled for February 14.
It warned that proceeding with finalisation under the current circumstances would compromise legality, accuracy and fairness, potentially leading to the irreversible exclusion of genuine voters without effective remedies.
