The Election Commission has defended its SIR of electoral rolls, providing additional clarifications on the process, Form 6, declarations, and appeals filed in West Bengal.
In response to petitions against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar and decisions taken by the poll panel during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, the Election Commission has submitted a counter-affidavit before the Supreme Court. The 248-page response defends the SIR exercise as authorized by law and unanimously approved by all three members of the Commission.
Rejecting allegations that Form 6 had been amended, the poll body stated unequivocally that no changes were made to the statutory Form 6 used for voter registration. The EC clarified that any declaration attached during the SIR is a separate document provided by the SIR orders and ‘is not a part of Form 6.
The affidavit also addressed concerns about applicants giving details of themselves and their parents or grandparents from the 2002-03 rolls. The EC explained that the declaration used in the Bihar SIR was later replaced in subsequent orders to enable applicants to avoid submitting further documents once successfully mapped.
The poll body also addressed appeals filed in West Bengal against orders including electors in the rolls. According to the EC, these appeals were filed by officers of the state chief electoral officer’s office acting as statutory authorities in line with the apex court’s orders, and that 'matters were not brought to the Commission.
The affidavit further stated that any suggestion, observation, or query raised by a commissioner while a file is being processed does not constitute a decision of the Commission. The EC also cited Article 324(5) of the Constitution, which protects the CEC from removal except in the manner of a Supreme Court judge, and argued that any prayer to restrain the CEC from functioning was not maintainable.
Lastly, the EC rejected the petitioner’s contentions on electronic voting machines (EVMs). The EC stated that similar challenges had been rejected by the top court several times.
Source:
Akashvani News
