Key information
Summary
A public interest litigation was filed before the Supreme Court challenging
administrative guidelines issued during Special Intensive Revisions (SIR) of electoral
rolls. The petitioner organization alleged that field authorities were exercising
unbridled powers by demanding extensive citizenship proof from existing,
long-standing voters, threatening arbitrary disenfranchisement of marginalized
voters.
Evaluating plenary administrative authority under Article 324 (Superintendence
and Control of Elections) against basic democratic structure principles, the
Supreme Court examined the legal boundaries of executive verification. The Bench
underscored that while maintaining accurate voter registries is vital for free and fair
elections, routine electoral roll maintenance cannot be converted into an oppressive
or arbitrary citizenship determination exercise without specific statutory authority.
Issuing restrictive directions, the apex court held that the Election Commission and
registration officers lack unlimited authority to conduct sweeping citizenship
verification of pre-existing enrolled voters during roll revisions. The Court ruled that
administrative inquiries must follow strict proportionality standards, prohibiting
authorities from removing existing voters without issuing prior written notice and
providing reasonable opportunity for hearing, thereby protecting fundamental voting
rights.
