NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday extended the deadline for scrutiny of claims and objections under the special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal and sought a personal affidavit from the state’s director general of police over allegations of threats, violence and obstruction faced by election officials during the exercise. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and N V Anjaria directed that the scrutiny of documents and objections be extended by at least one week beyond February 14, the scheduled date for publication of the final electoral roll, citing the time required to examine claims.The court also made it clear that it would not allow any disruption of the SIR process. “We will not allow anyone to create any impediment in the SIR exercise. It must be clear to the states,” the CJI said, while hearing a batch of petitions, including one filed by West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee.

Final authority rests with EROs, micro-observers only to assist

Clarifying a key point of contention, the bench reiterated that final decisions on claims and objections can be taken only by Electoral Registration Officers (EROs), and that micro-observers appointed by the Election Commission of India (ECI) have only an assisting role.“The responsibility already assigned to micro-observers shall be only to assist the DEO/EROs. In other words, the final decision will be taken by the EROs only,” the court said. The bench also clarified that EROs are duty-bound to consider objections as per the statutory scheme, whether or not the objector appears for a personal hearing, and that the genuineness of documents may be verified independently.

State to deploy Group B officers, ECI to decide suitability

To streamline the process, the court directed the West Bengal government to ensure that all 8,550 Group B officers, whose list was submitted during the hearing, report to district collectors or EROs by Tuesday evening.From this pool, the ECI may shortlist officers equivalent to the number of micro-observers already engaged, after assessing their bio-data and work experience, and provide them brief training. The court said the manner of their deployment and work profile would be decided by the poll panel, which would also be free to replace officers found not performing their duties.

Notice to DGP over violence, burning of notices

Taking note of the ECI’s affidavit alleging intimidation, hostility and burning of notices by miscreants, the bench issued notice to the West Bengal DGP, directing him to file a personal affidavit.The court noted the ECI’s submission that despite repeated complaints, no FIRs had been registered in connection with alleged violence and mass burning of Form 7 objections. It also recalled its January 19 order directing the DGP to ensure maintenance of law and order during the SIR exercise.“A message must go that the Constitution of India applies to all states,” solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, submitted.

‘No mass exclusion’, says court during Banerjee hearing

During the hearing, senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for Banerjee, raised apprehensions about the appointment of micro-observers from outside the state and the possibility of “mass exclusion” of eligible voters.“We don’t want any mass exclusion,” Divan told the bench.The court took note of these concerns while clarifying that the statutory authority to decide claims vests only with EROs.The bench was hearing a clutch of petitions filed by Trinamool Congress leaders and others challenging the conduct of the SIR in West Bengal, along with petitions by Sanatani Sangsad, poet Joy Goswami and others. While Banerjee’s plea questions the ECI’s categorisation of voters under a “logical discrepancy” category, Sanatani Sangsad has sought protection for election officials and deployment of state police under ECI control.Last week, Banerjee appeared in person before the Supreme Court, alleging that West Bengal was being targeted ahead of the assembly elections and raising concerns over minor name mismatches arising from translation from Bengali and local dialects.(With inputs from PTI and Live Law)