“No Further Orders Necessary”: Supreme Court Dismisses TMC Plea On Centre-Appointed Counting Officers In Bengal Elections

In Trinamool Congress' plea challenging ECI's appointment of Central government and central PSU employees in West Bengal elections' counting process, the Supreme Court today observed that the ECI Circular, which provides that counting personnel should be a random selection of central and state governme employees, shall be followed in letter and spirit."No further orders are necessary except to reiterate the statement of Mr. Naidu (for ECI) that the circular dated April 13th 2026 will be implemented in letter and spirit" the Court said in AITC plea against ECI direction that at least one among the Counting Supervisor and Counting Assistant at each table must be a Central Government/ Central PSU employee.A special bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Joymalya Bagchi passed the order, while dealing with a plea filed by All India Trinamool Congress against appointment of Central Government and Central PSU employees as counting supervisors and assistants for the West Bengal Assembly elections, 2026.Notably, the bench was constituted today for an urgent hearing, as the vote counting for the elections will begin at 8 AM on Monday, May 4.During the hearing, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, for AITC, raised 4 issues - (i) the Circular appointing Central employees was issued to DEOs on April 13, but came to knowledge only on April 29 (ii) ECI says it has apprehension of irregularity at every booth (iii) ECI already has a central government nominee at each counting table (in form of micro observer) and (iv) ECI did not appoint state govt nominee even though the Circular provides for one."CEO's communication says that there are apprehensions expressed from various quarters regarding possible irregularities in counting...They want another central govt nominee because they fear possible irregularities. That is pointing a finger at the state government..." Sibal urged. "There must be some data. Where is the apprehension from each booth? They have not disclosed this. And why not tell us that there going to have a central government nominee?" the senior counsel questioned.Hearing Sibal, Justice Bagchi said even if the Circular had provided for appointment of Central employees as both counting supervisor and counting assistant, the Court could not have faulted the decision."The option is open that the counting supervisor and counting assistant may be of the central government or may be of the state government. So when that option is open we can't hold that the notification is contrary to regulations. They can even say that both of them can be Central. Even if they had said that we could not have faulted them. Because regulation say that either Central Government or state government officers can be appointed", said Justice Bagchi.Subsequently, Sibal pressed that the ECI be asked to follow the impugned Circular, which provides for a state government nominee. "All we want is, in terms of the Circular, the state government nominee should be there", he said.Senior Advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu appeared for ECI and contended that the returning officer has overarching power and he is from the state government cadre. "Each candidate will I also have their own counting agent. It is a completely misplaced apprehension", he urged.Ultimately, the bench was of the view that no interference was warranted, except to reiterate that ECI's circular should be followed in letter and spirit.What did AITC's petition say?AITC approached the Court challenging the Calcutta High Court order which dismissed an application filed by it against a communication issued by the Additional Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal providing, “at least one among the Counting Supervisor and Counting Assistant at each table shall be a Central Government/ Central PSU employee.”The impugned communication stated that the direction was being passed in view of apprehensions expressed by “various quarters” regarding possible irregularities in vote counting and to ensure transparency, integrity and orderly conduct.Against this, the AITC contended that appointing counting supervisors and assistants from Central Government and Central PSU employees, who are under the administrative control of the Central Government, created a reasonable apprehension of bias. The petition highlighted that the Central Government is run by AITC's political rival, the Bharatiya Janata Party, and such appointments undermined the principle that justice must not only be done but also be seen to be done.AITC further sought a stay of the High Court's April 30, 2026 judgment and communication dated April 13, 2026. In the alternative, it sought a direction to deploy both Central and State Government employees as counting supervisors and assistants at each counting table. It also sought a direction to preserve CCTV footage of all counting rooms during the pendency of the proceedings.The party argued that the impugned communication was arbitrary and violative of Article 14. It pointed out that similar...

“No Further Orders Necessary”: Supreme Court Dismisses TMC Plea On Centre-Appointed Counting Officers In Bengal Elections

Amisha Shrivastava & Debby Jain

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

“No Further Orders Necessary”: Supreme Court Dismisses TMC Plea On Centre-Appointed Counting Officers In Bengal Elections

Amisha Shrivastava & Debby Jain

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers