Overview
The Election Commission of India (EC) has told the Supreme Court that more than 37 lakh of the total 38.2 lakh appeals arising from the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in West Bengal are still pending before 19 Appellate Tribunals. Only 1,02,231 appeals have been disposed of so far.
Key Developments
- EC affidavit (dated 16 September 2026) lists 38,20,683 appeals filed across 24 districts of West Bengal.
- Pending appeals stand at 37,18,452; only 1,02,231 have been decided.
- Only about 7 lakh appeals are from disenfranchised voters seeking re‑inclusion; the rest are either EC‑initiated or filed by other objectors aiming to exclude more names.
- District‑wise pendency is stark – e.g., Murshidabad has 7,47,921 appeals with just 514 disposed; Uttar Dinajpur has 3,03,155 pending and 9,104 disposed.
- The Supreme Court, acting on a petition filed under Right to Information (RTI), ordered the EC to provide a detailed breakup of inclusion vs. exclusion appeals.
Important Facts
• The SIR exercise has already deleted more than 1.5 crore names in its third phase.
• Senior advocates Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Neha Rathi represented petitioner Prasenjit Bose (Chairperson, SIR Committee, West Bengal Pradesh Congress Committee) in the Supreme Court.
• The Court has asked the EC to consider a mechanism for faster disposal and to prioritize appeals filed by disenfranchised voters before the upcoming municipal polls.
Exam Relevance
The episode illustrates several themes that frequently appear in the UPSC syllabus:
- Functioning and accountability of constitutional bodies like the EC and the Supreme Court.
- Use of RTI as a tool for civic oversight.
- Electoral reforms, voter registration, and the impact of large‑scale roll‑cleaning on democratic participation.
- Judicial intervention in administrative processes, especially before elections (municipal polls in West Bengal).
Way Forward
1. Prioritise disenfranchised voters: The tribunals should fast‑track the ~7 lakh inclusion appeals to ensure voting rights before municipal elections.
2. Increase tribunal capacity: Based on the pendency data, the Supreme Court may order more tribunals or additional judges.
3. Transparency mechanism: Regular public updates on appeal status, possibly through an online dashboard, would address RTI concerns.
4. Policy review: The EC may need to revisit the SIR methodology to reduce the volume of appeals in future roll‑cleaning exercises.
These steps can help restore confidence in the electoral process and ensure that the upcoming municipal polls are conducted with a complete and accurate voter list.