The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the 19 appellate tribunals “to revisit the full records” while adjudicating objections to the exclusion and inclusion of voters in Bengal during the ongoing SIR.

The top court was informed that around 47 lakh of the 60 lakh cases under adjudication had been disposed of as on March 31. A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi recorded in its order a letter addressed to it by Calcutta High Court Chief Justice Sujoy Paul that said the remaining claims would be vetted by April 7.

The post-SIR supplementary lists have names of those who have made it to the electoral rolls and those who have been removed.

The court said the tribunals would also adjudicate upon the pleas of Election Commission officials who may be aggrieved by the inclusion of certain names in the voter list by adjudicating authorities, which include 700 judicial officers from Bengal, Odisha and Jharkhand.

“To eliminate any doubt, we request the appellate tribunals to revisit the full records, including the reasons assigned by the judicial officers while adjudicating the objections, before making a decision on the appeals filed before them, and also to inform the parties of these reasons,” the bench said.

“The appellate tribunals are free to evolve their own procedures in accordance with the principles of natural justice, and are requested to adjudicate the appeals after providing the parties with a fair opportunity of being heard,” the bench said, posting the matter for further hearing to 4pm on Monday.

During the hearing, the bench orally brushed aside apprehensions raised by senior advocates Shyam Divan and Kalyan Banerjee, representing the Bengal government, over the submission of a large number of Form 6 appeals for the inclusion of voters by some political parties.

“This is not happening for the first time. It happens every time during elections. You can raise your objections,” CJI Kant, heading the bench, observed.

Justice Bagchi said the exclusion of voters from electoral rolls did not necessarily mean that their voting rights had been permanently taken away.

The court noted that a person unable to cast his or her vote in the upcoming elections would still have the right to be included in the poll rolls in the future by establishing their credentials through valid evidence. Similarly, people wrongly included in the current list can be excluded if found ineligible.

“There is no reason why the entire cleansing exercise should not be taken to the logical conclusion,” Justice Bagchi observed.

“Let us allow the tribunals to deal with the exclusion or inclusion of the voters from the list... Ultimately, you are not remediless,” the top court said.

The bench made the observation after Divan and Banerjee expressed fear that 45 per cent of the 47 lakh names that are on the post-SIR supplementary lists would be struck off the rolls.

The bench noted that on March 20, the poll panel notified the constitution of 19 appellate tribunals that would be working from the Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee National Institute of Water and Sanitation on Diamond Harbour Road in Calcutta for the next eight weeks. The institute is run by the department of drinking water and sanitation under the Jal Shakti ministry.

“It goes without saying that, as and when required, the Election Commission of India will either seek further extension from the ministry of Jal Shakti and/ or identify alternative premises in consultation with the parties,” the bench said. We, however, clarify that, in any case, the appellate tribunals shall function at Calcutta.”

It said they were informed by Dama Seshadri Naidu, senior counsel for the EC, that the orientation/ training to presiding and member judges of the appellate tribunals “would be undertaken during the course of the day, so that they can conveniently handle the software dealing with the appeals which have been filed online as well as offline”.

The bench said the Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court has also highlighted the issue of alleged non-availability of “reasons” for the rejection of the objections by the adjudicating authority.

The poll panel has assured the court that the tribunals will have access to the records submitted by the parties before the judicial officers while deciding on the appeals.