“Don’t even dare to question the judicial officers. What more sacrifice do you want from them? They are working overtime to hear the cases of deleted voters from West Bengal. I will not tolerate this,” Chief Justice Surya Kant said.
Image: IANS
Taking strong exception to doubts raised over judicial officers involved in the adjudication of claims and objections relating to nearly 50 lakh names figuring in the “logical discrepancy” and “unmapped” category, the Supreme Court on Tuesday said that it will not tolerate attempts to question the decisions of the judicial officers.
Berating the applications pointing to the pendency of claims before judicial officers, a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi directed the Election Commission of India and the West Bengal government to provide full logistical support and necessary facilities for the conduct of the SIR.
Advertisement
“Don’t even dare to question the judicial officers. What more sacrifice do you want from them? They are working overtime to hear the cases of deleted voters from West Bengal. I will not tolerate this,” Chief Justice Surya Kant said.
Advertisement
“As the Chief Justice of India, I will not tolerate attempts to cast doubt on judicial officers,” he said, adding that no one should dare question their integrity.
Addressing concerns over the absence of an independent appellate mechanism to appeal against exclusions from the electoral rolls, the Supreme Court on Tuesday requested the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to constitute an appellate tribunal of former Chief Justices or judges to hear appeals against decisions taken during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.
The court also requested the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to fix the honorarium to be paid to judges manning the appellate tribunals. The court also requested the Chief Justice to fix the honorarium for former judicial officers involved in the adjudication of claims and objections relating to names figuring in the “logical discrepancy” and “unmapped” categories. The court said the payment of the honorarium would be borne by the Election Commission of India. It noted that 200 judicial officers have come to Bengal from the neighbouring Odisha and Jharkhand.
Earlier, in its February 24 order, while permitting the Election Commission of India (ECI) to publish the final electoral roll on February 28, the Supreme Court had said that supplementary voter lists to be published later, after adjudication of claims and objections relating to persons in the “logical discrepancy” and “unmapped” categories, would be treated as part of the final electoral roll published on February 28, 2026.
The court passed the order in exercise of its plenary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution after receiving a communication dated February 22 from the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court. The communication stated that given the enormity of the exercise of deciding claims and objections relating to nearly 50 lakh names in the “logical discrepancy” and “unmapped” categories, it would take around 80 days to complete the task.
Following this communication, the Supreme Court on February 24 relaxed its earlier order of February 20 and permitted the additional deployment of Civil Judges (Senior Division) and Civil Judges (Junior Division) with at least three years’ experience to assist in adjudicating claims and objections relating to voters placed in the “logical discrepancies” and “unmapped” categories.
The court further directed that if the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court required more judicial officers, he could approach the Chief Justices of the High Courts of Orissa and Jharkhand to request serving or retired judicial officers of similar rank to assist in the SIR exercise. It requested the Chief Justices of the two High Courts to consider such requests sympathetically and expeditiously.
Earlier, on February 20, noting a “trust deficit” and lack of cooperation between the West Bengal government and the Election Commission of India (ECI), and terming the situation surrounding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls as “extraordinary”, the Supreme Court had directed deployment of serving as well as former District or Additional District Judges to oversee adjudication of claims and objections relating to voters placed in the “logical discrepancies” category.
Advertisement
