Three out of 19 SIR tribunals vacant; ECI awaits names from Calcutta HC

The Special Intensive Revision, or SIR, is an exercise to revise electoral rolls. It matters because the process changed who appeared on the voter lists before upcoming elections. The article says millions of names were purged or contested, creating disputes about eligibility and possible exclusion from voting.

The article records two main types of appeals. Deleted voters filed 22.2 lakh appeals challenging their removal. Another 16.1 lakh appeals contested the inclusion of voters’ names. The article does not give individual reasons for every deletion or challenge. The opposition alleges that algorithm-driven processes disproportionately targeted minority communities and traditional opposition strongholds.

Special tribunals were created to decide these disputes after Supreme Court directions. They have received 38.3 lakh appeals but resolved only about 1.02 lakh. This slow process has left more than 37 lakh voters in legal limbo. The situation is especially urgent because local and municipal elections are nearing, raising concerns about possible mass disenfranchisement if cases remain unresolved.

The 19 appellate tribunals are special tribunals established in West Bengal to adjudicate disputes from the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. They matter because they provide a formal route for people to challenge changes affecting their voter registration. The tribunals were set up on March 21 following directions from the Supreme Court.

Their caseload has two main parts. Deleted voters filed appeals challenging their exclusion from the rolls. Other appellants contested the inclusion of voters’ names. The figures submitted to the Supreme Court were 22.2 lakh appeals by deleted voters and 16.1 lakh appeals against inclusions, making 38.3 lakh appeals altogether.

The tribunals report to the Calcutta High Court, which oversees their judicial functioning. The Election Commission of India supplies secretarial assistance, including staff and an online-hearing platform. At least three tribunals currently lack heads, while the remaining system has resolved only about 1.02 lakh cases, leaving a major unresolved workload.

The backlog is exceptionally large. The tribunals received 38.3 lakh appeals connected to the electoral-roll revision. Of these, 22.2 lakh were filed by deleted voters challenging exclusion, while 16.1 lakh challenged the inclusion of voters’ names. Together, these figures show the scale of the dispute.

So far, the tribunals have resolved only about 1.02 lakh cases. That represents a completion rate below three per cent. The article says this figure comes from submissions made in the Supreme Court about shortcomings in the tribunal system. The appeals therefore greatly outnumber completed decisions.

At the current pace, petitioners told the Supreme Court that clearing the backlog could take more than 12 years. More than 37 lakh voters remain in legal limbo as local and municipal elections approach. Unless processing accelerates, many cases may remain unresolved when voters’ eligibility is needed for those elections.

At least three of West Bengal’s 19 appellate tribunals are vacant because they do not currently have heads. This matters because the tribunals are already facing a huge caseload, with 38.3 lakh appeals and fewer than three per cent resolved. Vacant leadership can add to concerns about delays, although the article does not quantify its direct effect.

The appointment process begins with the Calcutta High Court. It will send names of retired high court judges to the West Bengal chief electoral officer. The chief electoral officer will then notify the appointments to the three vacant tribunals. Thus, the new heads are expected to be retired judges rather than serving officials named directly by the ECI.

The tribunals report to the Calcutta High Court, while the ECI supplies administrative support. That support includes staff and a digital platform for online hearings. Filling the vacancies is therefore one part of addressing the wider backlog before local and municipal elections take place.

More than 37 lakh voters remain in legal limbo because their electoral-roll disputes have not been decided. This matters because local and municipal elections are nearing. Without a timely ruling, these voters may face uncertainty about whether their names will appear on the rolls or whether their challenges will succeed.

The underlying disputes are substantial. Of 38.3 lakh appeals, 22.2 lakh came from deleted voters challenging exclusion. Another 16.1 lakh contested the inclusion of voters’ names. The tribunals have resolved only about 1.02 lakh cases, a completion rate under three per cent. At the current pace, clearing the backlog could take over 12 years.

The article does not state exactly how many affected voters will be unable to vote. It reports widespread concern over potential mass disenfranchisement instead. Filling the three vacant tribunal heads and increasing the rate of decisions would be important before the approaching elections, but the article gives no timetable for completing the cases.

The Calcutta High Court has the main judicial role. The tribunals report to it, and the court will send names of retired high court judges for the three vacant tribunal-head positions. This places oversight of the dispute-resolution bodies with the High Court rather than solely with the election administration.

The Election Commission of India supports the tribunals operationally. It provides secretarial assistance, including staff and a digital platform for online hearings. The ECI also awaits the names needed to appoint new heads, but the article says the High Court supplies those names. The system therefore combines judicial supervision with election-administration support.

The West Bengal chief electoral officer has a formal appointment-notification role. After receiving the High Court’s names, the officer will notify the appointments to the vacant tribunals. In short, the High Court identifies retired judges, the chief electoral officer announces their appointments, and the ECI helps the tribunals function administratively and digitally.

Accurate electoral rolls are essential because elections can represent the public only when eligible voters are correctly recorded. Errors can exclude people from participation or create disputes over who belongs on the list. In this case, the article links the SIR exercise to millions of deletions and challenges, making accuracy and timely review especially important.

A wrongly deleted voter would normally need a clear way to learn about the decision, submit identity or residence evidence, request correction, and receive a reasoned decision. If the challenge fails, an appeal to an independent authority or court provides another safeguard. These steps help prevent an administrative error from becoming permanent exclusion.

The article identifies the special tribunals as the appeal mechanism created after Supreme Court directions. It does not detail their evidence rules or restoration procedure. Their limited progress is therefore significant: only about 1.02 lakh of 38.3 lakh appeals have been resolved, while more than 37 lakh voters remain in legal limbo.