WB Polls: PIL Before Calcutta High Court Challenges Voter Roll Deletions, Seeks Clear Appellate Framework Before Polling Begins

A Public Interest Litigation has been moved before the Calcutta High Court seeking urgent judicial intervention over alleged large-scale deletions from the West Bengal electoral rolls following the Election Commission of India's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.

The petition, filed by Sk Anwar Ali, contends that despite directions issued by the Supreme Court in the batch of matters concerning the West Bengal SIR process, the appellate mechanism for aggrieved voters remains “unclear, inaccessible, and inconsistently implemented.” The plea seeks a transparent and uniform framework for appeals before the 19 Appellate Tribunals constituted to hear disputes relating to inclusion and exclusion of names from the voter list.

The petitioner has alleged that lakhs of genuine voters face disenfranchisement ahead of the State Assembly elections due to the absence of clear procedures, timelines and communication regarding the appellate process. It is stated that affected electors remain uncertain about how to file appeals, whether supporting documents can be submitted, how hearing dates will be communicated, and whether representation through advocates would be permitted.

According to the plea, the Election Commission had announced the Special Intensive Revision of voter rolls in West Bengal on October 27, 2025. Subsequently, the Supreme Court, while hearing Mostari Banu v. Election Commission of India, directed creation of an appellate mechanism through tribunals headed by former judges. Thereafter, 19 Appellate Tribunals were constituted in consultation with the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court.

The petition refers to subsequent Supreme Court orders noting that over 34 lakh appeals had already been filed before the Appellate Tribunals, including appeals against alleged wrongful exclusion and objections to wrongful inclusion. The Tribunals were directed to function in accordance with a Standard Operating Procedure framed by a three-member committee of former judges.

The plea further highlights that the Supreme Court, invoking Article 142 of the Constitution, directed that where appeals are decided by April 21 or April 27 (depending on the polling phase), such decisions must be reflected in supplementary revised rolls so that eligible persons may vote. However, mere pendency of appeals would not entitle excluded persons to vote.

Against this backdrop, the petitioner argues that in the absence of prescribed timelines for disposal of appeals, similarly situated electors may be treated differently depending on the polling phase of their constituency or the fortuitous date on which their appeal is heard. This, it is contended, results in arbitrary discrimination violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

The plea also questions the alleged use of a vague criterion of “logical discrepancy” for excluding persons from electoral rolls, asserting that the burden has unlawfully been shifted onto citizens to prove their eligibility, thereby affecting rights under Article 326 and the Representation of the People Act, 1950.

Among the issues raised are whether fresh documents may be submitted during appeals, whether video-conference hearings can be held for distant districts, whether written orders will be supplied, and whether any final deadline exists for filing and deciding appeals.

The matter is likely to be heard tomorrow (Wednesday).

Case Title: Sk Anwar Ali v. Election Commission of India & Ors.