New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday closed a batch of petitions challenging the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Tamil Nadu in view of its recent judgment upholding the revision exercise in Bihar.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana passed the order, observing that the issues raised in the Tamil Nadu petitions stood covered by its earlier judgment delivered in the Bihar SIR matter.
However, the apex court granted liberty to the petitioners to pursue any other remedy available under the law.
The petitions, including one filed by the then-ruling party in Tamil Nadu, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), had challenged the poll body’s decision to extend the SIR exercise to the state ahead of the Assembly elections.
The DMK had contended that the ECI’s October 27 order directing a Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Tamil Nadu was arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of the Constitution.
It had been argued that the exercise, if allowed to continue, would arbitrarily disenfranchise lakhs of voters and violate Articles 14, 19, 21, 325, and 326 of the Constitution, as well as the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960. Describing the exercise as a “colourable exercise of power”, the plea had alleged that the SIR amounted to a “de facto National Register of Citizens (NRC)” by imposing citizenship-like burdens of proof on registered voters, even though the ECI lacked the authority to determine citizenship.
The petition further submitted that Tamil Nadu had already completed a Special Summary Revision of electoral rolls in January 2025, rendering a fresh de novo verification unnecessary, arbitrary, and without statutory justification.
In its verdict, the CJI Surya Kant-led Bench had held that the revision exercise was within the constitutional and statutory powers of the poll body and aimed at preserving the integrity of the electoral process.
The apex court had ruled that the SIR exercise did not violate the Representation of the People Act, 1950, or the rules framed thereunder, and held that the ECI was empowered to undertake such a revision under Article 324 of the Constitution read with Section 21(3) of the RPA.
Holding that the exercise advanced the constitutional imperative of free and fair elections, the top court had observed that “free and fair elections do not rest merely upon the mechanics of polling” but fundamentally depend upon the integrity, accuracy, and credibility of the electoral rolls.
It had also rejected the contention that the SIR constituted an impermissible citizenship exercise, holding that while the ECI was empowered to conduct a limited inquiry into citizenship for electoral purposes, such scrutiny did not amount to a final determination of citizenship under the Citizenship Act.
(IANS)
