A single Judge bench of the Calcutta High Court on Thursday observed that the Election Commission was changing its rules again and again.
“It has been seen that the Election Commission is changing its position again and again. According to the notification, EC has made provision for appointing judges as polling officers. Appoint us, we will go and perform the duty. You are changing the rules whenever you want,” said Justice Krishna Rao, during a hearing of a case challenging the commission’s decision to deploy college teachers for poll duty.
Justice Krishna Rao commented that a notification issued by the commission states that judges can also be appointed as polling officers and they may also have to go on duty for the special intensive revision of electoral rolls in Bengal.
The commission’s counsel argued that the case was filed right on the eve of the election and there was not enough time to recruit new people and train them for poll duty.
“This cannot be an argument. If a case is filed after the election, what will the court do? If the court turns a blind eye to irregularities, they will continue,” said Justice Krishna Rao.
The commission’s counsel informed the court that if they interfere with the notification now, they will have to appoint new personnel for poll duty in all 23 districts.
“Does that mean you will issue an unreasonable notification, and that will have to be accepted? Then I am sending this case to the Supreme Court. There, the commission should give this argument. Since the judges have been appointed for SIR, it should be used here too. Go to the Supreme Court," Justice Rao said.
The case will come up for hearing again on Friday.
During the day the same bench quashed the requisition of eight school buses from the South Point Education Society for election duty, calling the move “arbitrary” and “legally unsustainable.”
The court observed that the due process of law had not been followed and raised serious concerns over administrative overreach impacting students.
Advocate Biswaroop Bhattacharya, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, cited a notification issued by the Election Commission on February 8, 2023 that stated school buses could only be requisitioned as a “last resort.”
“The directive clearly stated that vehicles belonging to educational institutions—specifically meant for transporting students—should be requisitioned only as a “last resort” under unavoidable circumstances,” said Bhattacharya.
The court noted that the state had failed to justify such exigency in this case.
The ruling has brought into focus the recurring conflict between election logistics and the uninterrupted functioning of educational institutions.
With thousands of students dependent on school transport for daily access to education, the requisition had raised concerns among parents and educators over safety, accessibility, and academic disruption.