Judicial officers tasked with disposing of nearly 60 lakh SIR-related disputes in Bengal cannot see the comments made by electoral registration officers (EROs), AEROs and micro-observers when deciding each case.
Following the Election Commission’s instructions, previous comments by the poll officers have been deleted from the system to prevent judicial officers from being influenced by comments from either state or central government officers.
“This decision was made only to ensure that the judicial officers don’t get persuaded by any of the comments. Instead, they will have a fresh look at all documents,” said a senior poll panel official.
There are roughly 60 lakh cases in Bengal over which EROs and AEROs, who are state government officers, and micro-observers, who are central government officers, could not reach a consensus following voter verification hearings.
Sources said the micro-observers were not satisfied with the documents submitted by the voters, but the AEROs and EROs had approved these cases for inclusion in the final poll rolls.
As the micro-observers had flagged these cases due to a lack of proper documents, the fate of these voters was in limbo when the Supreme Court stepped in and appointed judicial officers to take a final call.
As the EC wanted to ensure the judicial officers get a system where they can make a decision based on merits only, all previous comments were removed.
“On the portal where the judicial officers log in, they can see the enumeration forms of the voters in question and the documents submitted by them. So, the judges will make a decision based on the uploaded documents only, and they will not have to consider the views of the EROs, AEROs and micro-observers. This was needed for an unbiased decision,” said a source.
A senior bureaucrat said that as the judicial officials would check if the voters have submitted the identity documents specified by the EC, there will be a little chance for dodgy voters to be included in the final rolls.
“The tussle between the state government and the EC took a critical turn as the state government officers were approving cases with ineligible documents for inclusion in the final rolls. When the micro-observers or the roll observers flagged these cases, the state government moved the Supreme Court against the micro-observers. Now, the EC is trying to ensure that comments and counter-comments of the state and the central officers don’t leave an impact on the decisions of the judicial officers,” said the bureaucrat.
Sources said that the decision-making process by the judicial officers would not be a tough one.
“They will check whether the voters have any of the documents specified by the EC. Aadhaar card as proof of identity is fine, but with other mandatory documents listed by the poll panel,” explained an official.
The official also said that voters called for hearings due to problems in progeny mapping would have to submit a document that established their relationship with the 2002 voters with whom the mapping was done, along with any of the documents specified by the EC.
“Judicial officers also have to put in comments on the portal to clarify why they decided on inclusion or exclusion in each case,” said an official.