The Supreme Court observed that Article 32 cannot be invoked to resolve every administrative grievance while hearing a plea against West Bengal’s Special Intensive Revision, where voters raised concerns over surname mismatches and documentation issues during verification.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court expressed concern over the expanding scope of petitions being filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, while hearing a plea challenging issues arising out of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process in West Bengal.
A three-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice R. Mahadevan observed that the apex court cannot be expected to adjudicate every administrative or individual grievance under its writ jurisdiction, particularly when such interventions risk stalling statutory processes.
During the hearing, counsel appearing for the petitioner highlighted persistent difficulties faced by individuals due to logical and cultural discrepancies in surnames, especially in the Bengali context.
“My Lords, difficulties persist due to logical discrepancies—particularly surname mismatches arising from cultural variations, such as Mukherjee and Mukhopadhyay. Even Aadhaar is not being accepted in several cases,”
the counsel submitted.
The argument highlighted how variations in spelling and traditional surname usage were allegedly leading to documentation mismatches during verification under the SIR exercise.
Responding to the submissions, CJI Surya Kant cautioned against the routine filing of interlocutory applications in Article 32 proceedings.
“In proceedings under Article 32, we cannot resolve every such issue. Interlocutory applications are being filed daily, and the impression is that the effort is merely to stall the process,”
the Chief Justice observed.
The remark reflects the Court’s growing concern over the judicial overburdening of constitutional remedies meant for the enforcement of fundamental rights, rather than the micro-management of administrative procedures.
ALSO READ: West Bengal SIR Row: Supreme Court Lists All Connected Cases for January 19
When the advocate requested a listing of the interlocutory application, the Bench agreed to consider it.
CJI said,
“List it on Monday.”
The matter is now be taken up on Monday for further consideration.
Earlier, the Supreme Court issued a comprehensive set of directions to ensure transparency, fairness, and voter convenience in the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal, following allegations of arbitrariness and large-scale inconvenience to voters.
A Bench led by CJI Surya Kant, along with Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, took note of concerns surrounding the “logical discrepancy” category, which covered over 1.36 crore voters, including issues such as spelling variations in names, parental details, and age gaps.
The Court directed public disclosure of affected voters’ names, permitted submission of documents through authorised representatives, including Booth Level Agents, mandated assistance at the panchayat and block levels, extended timelines for compliance, and emphasised that no voter should be disenfranchised without a fair hearing. The Bench highlighted that electoral roll correction must be non-arbitrary, transparent, and humane.
READ LIVE COVERAGE
Click Here to Read More Reports on West Bengal’s SIR
