Supreme Court slams attempts to question judicial officers in Bengal voter roll dispute

PTC Web Desk: The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued a stern warning to all parties involved in the West Bengal electoral roll dispute, cautioning them against casting doubts on judicial officers assigned to examine cases of voters whose names were removed during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.

A Bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant strongly criticised attempts to question the integrity of court-appointed judicial officers who are hearing appeals from voters challenging their exclusion from the rolls. The Bench noted that the officers were already working beyond regular hours to handle the large number of cases and should not be subjected to unwarranted criticism.

During the hearing, the Chief Justice expressed displeasure over a fresh application that appeared to challenge the decisions of these officers. He stressed that the court would not tolerate any attempt to undermine judicial authorities performing duties under the court’s supervision.

The Bench also directed the Election Commission of India to respond to concerns earlier raised by the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court regarding the ongoing voter list revision exercise in the state.

The court further instructed the poll body and the government led by Mamata Banerjee to ensure that the judicial officers handling appeals receive adequate logistical and administrative support to complete their work effectively.

While hearing the matter, the Bench also questioned the conduct of both sides in the litigation, remarking that the court was not entirely convinced about the intentions of the parties involved. The observation came after senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy and Trinamool Congress MP and lawyer Kalyan Banerjee, representing the petitioners, told the court they were unaware of any new application challenging the authority of the judicial officers.

In a significant development, the apex court also ordered the creation of Appellate Tribunals to hear appeals from voters who may be dissatisfied with the decisions of the judicial officers reviewing SIR-related claims. These tribunals will be composed of former High Court Chief Justices and retired High Court judges to provide an independent appellate mechanism.

Under the court’s directions, individuals whose claims are rejected by the judicial officers during the revision process will be allowed to approach these tribunals. However, the court clarified that the decisions of the judicial officers will not be subject to review by any executive or administrative authority.

The Bench requested the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to recommend suitable retired judges, preferably former Chief Justices or judges from the Calcutta High Court or neighbouring states such as Odisha and Jharkhand, to serve on these appellate bodies. Once recommended, the Election Commission will formally notify them as members of the tribunals.

The court left it to the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to determine the composition and number of members on each appellate bench. It also directed the High Court to decide the honorarium for the retired judges serving on these panels in consultation with the Election Commission, which will bear the cost of the arrangement.

The issue of publishing supplementary lists of voters whose objections have already been examined was also raised during the proceedings. Petitioners pointed out that the number of objections in the revision process had reportedly crossed one million, raising concerns about the handling of the cases.

Taking note of the concern, the Supreme Court allowed both sides to approach the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court for appropriate directions regarding the publication of such supplementary lists.

The case relates to disputes over the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in West Bengal, which has seen tensions between the state government and the Election Commission over the conduct and supervision of the exercise.