Delhi SIR: 78.5% of 33 lakh voter roll discrepancy cases resolved, says CEO

A Special Intensive Revision, or SIR, is a detailed exercise to check and update an electoral roll. It examines whether listed voters are correctly recorded and whether eligible people have been excluded. It matters because the roll determines who can take part in an election.

In Delhi, the revision flagged voters who could not be linked to the roll from the previous SIR or whose enumeration forms contained “logical discrepancies.” Booth-level officers visited homes to collect documents and verify these cases. The exercise also included identifying eligible people missing from the draft roll.

The Delhi verification process was scheduled to finish by October 29. Final electoral rolls were due on November 4. The Supreme Court said notices needed clear reasons, warning that some appeared to have been issued “almost mechanically.” The exercise therefore affects both the accuracy of the roll and voters’ practical ability to protect their registration.

Delhi flagged about 33.1 lakh voters during the Special Intensive Revision. These voters received notices because their records were not linked to the previous SIR roll or because their forms showed a “logical discrepancy.” They represented about one-third of the 97.5 lakh voters included in the draft roll.

By Saturday, the chief electoral officer said around 26 lakh cases had been resolved. That was reported as 78.5% of the total cases. Of the flagged voters, 13.7 lakh lacked a link to the previous SIR roll, while 19.3 lakh faced notices over discrepancies in their enumeration forms.

Verification of the cases was due to finish on October 29. The final electoral rolls were scheduled for publication on November 4. The figures show a large administrative effort, but they also leave millions of records dependent on document collection and official verification before the final list is issued.

Notices were issued when officials found problems connecting a voter’s record to the electoral roll from the last Special Intensive Revision. They were also issued when an enumeration form contained what officials called a “logical discrepancy.” These categories triggered further verification rather than automatically proving that a voter was ineligible.

The Delhi figures show the scale of each problem. About 13.7 lakh voters were flagged because they could not link themselves to the previous SIR roll. Another 19.3 lakh received notices because of logical discrepancies in their enumeration forms. Together, these groups made up about 33.1 lakh cases.

The Supreme Court questioned whether the notices gave enough detail. On September 22, it said voters needed clarity about the reasons for a logical-discrepancy notice. It also observed that the notices appeared to have been issued “almost mechanically.” Booth-level officers were then visiting homes to collect documents and verify the cases.

If officials find that a person is eligible but missing from Delhi’s draft electoral roll, the person can be considered for re-enrolment. The Delhi Election Commission ordered a special re-verification drive for this purpose. The goal is to correct omissions before the final roll is published.

The chief electoral officer directed booth-level officers to identify eligible electors left out of their allotted areas. They were told to facilitate enrolment through Form 6 wherever the person was found eligible. This work was to happen alongside verification of the 33 lakh people who received notices.

The arrangement reflects the risk created by a large roll revision. Delhi had about 1.4 crore electors before the exercise, while 47.7 lakh voters were removed from the draft roll. The final outcome depends on verification and enrolment decisions. Eligible voters who are successfully restored should appear in the final electoral roll scheduled for November 4.

Form 6 matters because the Delhi Election Commission identified it as the route for enrolling eligible people who were missing from the draft electoral roll. The chief electoral officer told booth-level officers to use it after checking whether an omitted person was eligible. This could help correct wrongful exclusions before the final roll.

The key mechanism was a parallel field exercise. While officers collected documents from the 33 lakh people who received notices, they were also instructed to identify left-out eligible electors in their assigned areas. The Election Commission had earlier directed states with completed revisions to use Form 6 to restore eligible voters.

That instruction has faced a legal and procedural objection. Former Chief Election Commissioner SY Quraishi said Form 6 cannot be filled by deleted voters because it is only for new voters. The dispute leaves uncertainty about the correct route for people removed from an earlier roll, even as Delhi’s re-verification drive proceeds.

Booth-level officers are the field workers in this process. They visit homes, collect documents from people who received notices, verify records, and identify eligible voters omitted from the draft roll. They also help eligible applicants pursue enrolment through Form 6.

The Delhi Election Commission directs the broader response. It ordered special re-verification for left-out eligible voters and set instructions for officers to conduct that work alongside discrepancy checks. The chief electoral officer reported progress, with around 26 lakh of 33.1 lakh cases resolved. Verification was due by October 29.

The Supreme Court’s role has been supervisory. It took note of concerns that notices lacked sufficient reasons and said voters needed clarity about logical discrepancies. It also said the notices appeared almost mechanical. The court’s intervention therefore focuses on fair and understandable procedure, while election officials handle the practical verification and final roll preparation.

Electoral rolls are the official voter lists used to determine who is registered to vote. A person missing from the relevant roll may be unable to vote, which is why an accurate and reviewable list matters. The Delhi exercise removed or questioned many records and created a process for verification and re-enrolment.

Delhi’s draft roll excluded 47.7 lakh people from a pre-revision electorate of about 1.4 crore. The stated categories included permanently shifted, deceased, absent, duplicate entries, and “other.” People in the notice process had to provide documents or clarify their records. Eligible people left out could be considered for enrolment.

Removal does not itself establish that someone is not an Indian citizen. The article states that the Supreme Court upheld the SIR’s legality but said this did not allow the Election Commission to decide whether a person is an Indian citizen. The roll records voting eligibility; citizenship determination is a separate legal question.