February 05 (TSP Bangla) – Chief minister Mamata Banerjee on Wednesday personally appeared in the Supreme Court to argue her case against the Election Commission of India (ECI), alleging that Bengal was being unfairly targeted during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
Appearing as a petitioner-in-person in the matter titled Mamata Banerjee vs ECI, based on an interlocutory application she had filed in her individual capacity, Banerjee accused the poll panel and the BJP of “bulldozing” citizens through the revision process.
She told the court that nearly 58 lakh voters in Bengal had allegedly been deleted from the electoral rolls, while more than 1.3 crore electors had been placed under the category of “logical discrepancies” during the SIR exercise.
Banerjee said she had written at least six letters to the Election Commission seeking clarification and corrective steps. According to her, she decided to move the apex court and argue the matter herself after failing to receive what she described as a satisfactory response from the poll body.
“I am here… because justice is crying behind the doors,” Mamata told a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, addressing the judges mostly as “Sir”.
The Supreme Court issued a notice to the Election Commission on Mamata Banerjee’s plea, which seeks a stay on the ongoing SIR exercise in Bengal and restoration of the earlier electoral rolls for the upcoming Assembly elections.
The court posted the matter for further hearing on February 9.
Mamata said the SIR was only aimed at deletion, not inclusion, of voters.
“They (EC) point out a mismatch in title and surnames of persons. Suppose a daughter gets married and goes to her in-laws’ house, they are asking why she is using her husband’s name… that is also a mismatch, they say,” Mamata told the bench of CJI Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi.
The bench concurred with Mamata Banerjee and her counsel, senior advocate Shyam Divan, that common Bengali surnames such as Tagore, Dutta and Roy are often spelled in different ways and that such variations cannot, by themselves, justify deletion of names from the electoral rolls on the ground of a “mismatch.”
“We don’t know how Tagore might be pronounced or spelt in different dialects, but that does not mean Tagore is not Tagore. Roy, Dutta, Ganguly… there are variations as to how they are spelt, but that should not lead to the violation of fundamental rights,” the bench observed.
The Supreme Court suggested that the Bengal government depute an adequate number of officials familiar with the state’s various dialects to assist the Election Commission in addressing issues arising from name mismatches during the SIR exercise.
During the hearing, Mamata Banerjee questioned why a similar Special Intensive Revision was not being conducted in BJP-ruled Assam, indicating that the exercise in Bengal appeared to be politically motivated.
“They are targeting Bengal by also appointing micro-observers and to bulldoze the Bengal people. Logical discrepancies cannot be deleted. It is being done by micro-observers appointed from BJP-ruled states,” Mamata toldthe bench.
“Why are they not doing it in Assam? Why not in Assam?” she asked.
The chief minister told the court that the Election Commission had appointed 8,300 micro-observers to verify the electoral rolls without any statutory backing. She alleged that these micro-observers were deleting names from their offices, even though such powers rest exclusively with electoral registration officers (EROs).
Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the Election Commission, argued that the poll panel had been compelled to appoint micro-observers after the state allegedly failed to comply with an earlier Supreme Court directive to depute adequate staff.
Dwivedi submitted that the Commission had sought the appointment of Class II officers from Bengal to serve as EROs, but the state had not extended the required cooperation.
Responding to the claim, Mamata Banerjee maintained that sufficient staff had already been deputed for the SIR exercise.
The Chief Justice of India intervened during the exchange and observed that the state should provide additional personnel to assist the Election Commission in carrying out the revision process.
Mamata accused the EC of “unilaterally deleting the names of people”.
“They are not accepting Aadhaar cards. Bengal people are so happy that this court gave the order that Aadhaar will be one of the documents of proof…. In other states, domicile certificates and OBC certificates are allowed, but they only targeted Bengal due to the elections. Four states are going to have elections soon. What was the hurry to do it (SIR) in three months?” she asked.
Mamata Banerjee told the court that the revision process, which typically takes nearly two years to complete, was being carried out within a compressed period of three months. She pointed out that the exercise was unfolding during the festival and harvesting seasons in Bengal, making it particularly difficult for many residents to participate.
She further alleged that several living individuals had been wrongly marked as deceased during the ongoing verification process.
The Chief Justice of India observed that the court would refrain from making any comments on the validity of Aadhaar as a proof document, noting that judgment had already been reserved on a batch of petitions challenging the SIR exercise.
“Aadhaar card has its own limitations. We don’t want to comment on it. We are yet to determine it. You have raised some issues like logical discrepancies. We will give them (EC) one day to reply,” CJI Kant said.
