‘Left out’ voters: EC orders special drive in 20 states where SIR over

Why in the News

Voters deleted in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) will now return through the plain statutory Form 6, not a form carrying an extra SIR declaration, in the 20 States and Union Territories (UTs) where the revision is over. The Election Commission of India (ECI) ordered this special drive amid scrutiny over 13 crore names struck off draft rolls in 30 States and UTs.

What is the special drive, and how will it bring voters back?

1. What the SIR was: A door to door recheck of every voter entry, like a fresh census of voters, that struck ineligible names off draft rolls.
2. The directive: The ECI’s Secretary told all Chief Electoral Officers (CEOs), who run elections in each State, to enrol “left out” and first time electors under continuous updation, the routine process of adding voters at any time.
3. Roll comparison and house visits: CEOs must compare pre-SIR and post-SIR rolls and list those deleted. Officials will then visit genuine voters to fill Form 6, the form for new voters, helped by party booth level agents.
4. The takeaway: The Commission is using its ordinary enrolment route to repair exclusions its own revision created.

Why was the SIR question dropped from Form 6?

1. The July change: The online Form 6 began asking whether the applicant or the parents were on the roll after the last SIR. An 18 year old whose parents had been deleted could not answer truthfully.
2. Who can change the form: Only the government can, by amending the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, and it had not.
3. Commissioners’ objection: Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi objected in May that the Rules had not been amended. Sandhu later called the change “unauthorised/illegal”.
4. The correction: The ECI’s letter to CEOs confines the declaration to the “SIR phase only”. Outside an SIR, the forms prescribed under the 1960 Rules apply.

Why is control over ECINet contested?

1. Dissent on record: The two Commissioners objected 14 times in 10 months to decisions taken without their knowledge, including centralised control of ECINet, the software holding every electoral roll.
2. Law versus access: The law gives roll duties to Electoral Registration Officers (EROs), who maintain each constituency’s roll, and to CEOs. Sandhu noted that the Director General (IT) had centralised ECINet access instead, and Joshi sought an audit.
3. Goa’s blocked restorations: Goa’s EROs cleared 97 deleted voters for restoration, but ECINet had no way to reverse a deletion. The Goa CEO’s messages to the Commission went unanswered.
4. Review promised: The Commission’s September 26 meeting set up a committee with an independent IIT/IIIT expert to review ECINet.

How is Maharashtra handling voters still under revision?

1. No hearing for flagged voters: The September 26 meeting ruled that voters served notices need not appear for hearings. These were voters marked “unmapped”, meaning not linked to a relative in the previous roll, or flagged for “logical discrepancies” in their details.
2. No hasty exclusion: Maharashtra, where the SIR is still under way, told EROs to give a fresh chance, a hearing and an order before removing any name.
3. Documents at the doorstep: Booth Level Officers (BLOs) will collect documents at homes for the ERO to decide, and special camps will be held.
4. Scale of the task: The State’s draft roll flagged 1.22 crore records for verification.

Challenges

1. Burden on the excluded: Wrongly deleted citizens must reapply as new voters.
2. Software over statute: Statutory officers cannot correct rolls where the software blocks them.
3. Divided Commission: Decisions bypassing two Commissioners weaken a multi member body.
4. Uneven reach: House visits depend on BLO capacity, so migrants may still be missed.

Way Forward

1. Forms by rule only: The ECI should alter forms only after the government amends the Rules.
2. Restore ERO powers: ECINet should let EROs reverse deletions overturned on evidence.
3. Publish deletion lists: CEOs should publish booth wise SIR deletion lists.
4. Formal sittings: The full Commission should decide roll procedure in recorded meetings.

Conclusion

The Commission has conceded that its revision left eligible citizens out and is using routine enrolment to restore them. Whether the software review returns control to the officers the law holds responsible will decide if future revisions repeat these exclusions.

Key numbers

1. Relatives’ details mismatch: 62.48 lakh records in Maharashtra’s draft roll.
2. Unmapped to a relative in the previous roll: 59.75 lakh records in Maharashtra.
3. Maharashtra camp dates: October 3, 4, 10 and 11.

Matching Previous Year Question

“[2026, GS2, 10 marks] Is the right to vote a fundamental right? Discuss the position of the Election Commission of India while undertaking the revision of electoral rolls. Can it also examine the question of citizenship of voters?”