Today, On 17th November, The Indian Union Muslim League has moved the Supreme Court challenging the Election Commission of India’s decision to conduct a State-wide Special Intensive Revision of Kerala’s voter list. The party alleges the exercise is arbitrary, unconstitutional, and unnecessary.
The Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) has filed a petition in the Supreme Court contesting the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) decision to carry out a State-wide Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Kerala.
The Bench consisiting of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi heard the matter.
The party claims that this decision is arbitrary, unconstitutional, and strategically timed to exclude a large number of voters ahead of the local body elections.
Also Read: Delhi Red Fort Blast Case: Court Sends Amir Rashid Ali to 10-Day NIA Custody
The petition, submitted under Article 32 of the Constitution by the party’s General Secretary P.K. Kunhalikutty through Advocate on Record (AoR) R.S. Jena, targets the ECI’s Notification dated October 27, 2025, and a subsequent Press Note on November 4, 2025, which apply the SIR to Kerala.
The petitioner argues that the exercise essentially amounts to a complete verification of the entire electorate, despite the state having recently undergone a Special Summary Revision (SSR-2025), which culminated in the final electoral rolls being published on January 6, 2025.
Additionally, a continuous revision process under Rule 21A of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, is currently ongoing, making the SIR “wholly unnecessary,” according to the plea.
A key argument focuses on the timing of the SIR, which is slated from November 4 to December 4, 2025.
The Kerala State Election Commission announced its local body election schedule on November 11, with polling scheduled for December 9 and 11, and results expected on December 13. With the Model Code of Conduct in effect and state resources already occupied with the elections, the petitioner contends that the ECI has placed an undue burden on administrative personnel, particularly Booth Level Officers (BLOs) who must manage house visits and paperwork for both the elections and the SIR simultaneously.
The plea cites comments from several BLOs who indicated that it was “humanly impossible” to conduct three rounds of house visits within the allotted 30 days. It references the tragic suicide of BLO Aneesh George in Kerala and another similar incident in Rajasthan, attributing these events to overwhelming workload pressures during the SIR.
The IUML argues that the SIR imposes stringent and exclusionary documentation requirements. The ECI’s latest framework includes Aadhaar as a thirteenth document but omits widely used proofs like PAN cards, ration cards, and EPICs.
The petition claims that an “artificial classification” has been established among voters based on age and parentage, without any logical justification.
The petition also emphasizes the plight of Non-Resident Indian (NRI) voters, who make up a significant portion of the electorate in Kerala. While online registration is allowed, BLOs must verify a voter’s residence at the listed address physically. If a voter is abroad during this verification, their name may be omitted from the rolls.
This practice effectively disenfranchises NRI voters and others unable to present in person during the brief verification period. It is argued that the SIR grants BLOs excessive discretion to classify voters as “not ordinarily resident.”
If an elector fails to return the enumeration form or is unavailable at home, the BLO can recommend their removal based on categories such as Absent, Shifted, Death, or Duplicate.
The petitioner warns that this will lead to mass exclusion of legitimate voters, forcing them to reapply via Form 6 during the claims-and-objections phase after their names have been removed from the rolls.
The IUML asserts that the SIR framework serves as a “backdoor citizenship verification exercise” similar to the National Register of Citizens (NRC), which the ECI has no constitutional authority to conduct. The petition contends that the ECI’s powers under Article 324 do not extend to determining the citizenship or parentage of electors.
Also Read: Delhi Judge Holds 2:25 AM Hearing at Home, Sends Money Laundering Accused to ED Custody
The petition references ongoing Supreme Court challenges to a previous SIR initiative in Bihar, where the Court had expressed caution. Characterizing the ECI’s actions as arbitrary, unreasonable, and in violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 21, 325, and 326, the IUML is seeking to have the ECI’s October 27 notification and November 4 press note regarding Kerala quashed.
They also call for the electoral rolls finalized under SSR-2025 to remain valid until further notice, warning that the ongoing implementation of the SIR could lead to the wrongful removal of millions of voters and compromise the constitutional integrity of Kerala’s democratic process.
The Bench has scheduled hearings on the SIR for November 26 and 27.
Case Title: PK Kunhalikutty v. Election Commission of India & Anr.