In a measured exercise of judicial restraint, the Supreme Court of India declined to entertain a writ petition filed under Article 32 by 91 former residents of Akbar Nagar, Lucknow, who alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The Court instead directed the District Election Officer (DEO), Lucknow, to first examine their grievances, signaling that election roll disputes must ordinarily be addressed within the statutory administrative framework before invoking constitutional remedies
Background: Displacement and Electoral Status
The petitioners stated that they had resided in Akbar Nagar since before 1980 until the demolition of their homes during 2024–25. Following rehabilitation in Vasant Kunj on the outskirts of Lucknow, their constituency changed.
According to the petitioners:
-
Their names appeared in earlier electoral rolls, including the 2002 list and the 2025 summary revision.
-
During the SIR process, they were not issued Enumeration Forms (EFs).
-
Booth Level Officers allegedly directed them to file Form 6, typically used for new voter registration.
They argued that this approach incorrectly treated them as fresh applicants rather than existing electors seeking a change of address, potentially contravening Rule 13(3) of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
Represented by Senior Advocate M.R. Shamshad, the petitioners contended that the issue may not be isolated and could affect similarly displaced voters elsewhere.
Court’s Refusal Under Article 32
A Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi refused to exercise jurisdiction under Article 32 at this stage. The Court emphasized that constitutional intervention would be premature when an appropriate statutory remedy before the District Election Officer had not yet been exhausted.
When urged to consider the broader ramifications of the issue, the Chief Justice cautioned that entertaining such claims directly could “open a Pandora’s box,” particularly in matters involving electoral administration.
The Court clarified:
-
It was not expressing any opinion on the merits of the allegations.
-
The District Collector-cum-District Election Officer, Lucknow, must verify the factual assertions in the petitioners’ representation.
-
Action must be taken in accordance with law.
-
Petitioners are at liberty to approach the jurisdictional High Court if their grievances remain unresolved.
Judicial Restraint in Electoral Administration
The order underscores a recurring judicial principle: while the right to constitutional remedies is fundamental, election-related disputes are ordinarily governed by statutory procedures supervised by the Election Commission of India under Article 324 of the Constitution.
By declining to intervene directly, the Supreme Court reinforced:
-
Administrative Primacy: Electoral Registration Officers and District Election Officers are the first line of redressal.
-
Procedural Discipline: Article 32 is not a substitute for statutory remedies.
-
Institutional Balance: Courts avoid premature interference in ongoing electoral revision processes.
Broader Legal Context
The controversy touches upon a sensitive intersection of displacement, electoral rights, and procedural categorization. If displaced voters are required to apply under provisions meant for fresh registrations rather than address modifications, it raises questions about administrative uniformity and statutory compliance.
However, by channeling the dispute back to the DEO, the Court has effectively reaffirmed that electoral roll corrections must first traverse the administrative ladder before constitutional adjudication is invoked.
As the Special Intensive Revision continues, the District Election Officer’s findings may determine whether the matter evolves into a larger judicial examination of procedural safeguards for displaced electors.
For now, the Supreme Court’s message is clear: constitutional remedies remain available, but only after statutory processes are meaningfully pursued.
By KANISHKSOCIALMEDIA For more updates on environmental regulations, public health policies, and developments in India’s governance, follow Kanishk Social Media for comprehensive and timely coverage of critical issues. If you found this article helpful, share it with others interested in India’s environmental efforts and policy innovation
0 Comments