Analyse the constitutional and institutional tensions that arose during the SIR exercise in West Bengal in 2025–26, with reference to the roles of the Election Commission, the Supreme Court, and State government.

Q. Analyse the constitutional and institutional tensions that arose during the SIR exercise in West Bengal in 2025–26, with reference to the roles of the Election Commission, the Supreme Court, and State government. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

Article 324 vests superintendence of elections in the Election Commission of India, and Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 read with the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 empowers it to intensively revise electoral rolls. West Bengal's SIR (2025–26) tested where this autonomy meets federal comity and judicial review.

ECI: plenary mandate versus due process - Phase-II covered 9 States and 3 UTs, with enumeration through booth-level officers [1] — an administrative scale unmatched since 2002. - The purity rationale was real: West Bengal alone identified about 15.53 lakh dead voters [2]. - Yet automated flagging of "logical discrepancies" (e.g. improbable voter–parent age gaps) swept in roughly 1.25 crore names [4], a notice even reaching Nobel laureate Amartya Sen — exposing weak risk-stratification and dignity concerns. - Deploying additional Special Roll Observers drawn from central services [5] sharpened perceptions of centralised control.

State government: cooperative federalism under strain - Revision runs on State officials functioning under ECI direction — a dual accountability the exercise stretched, seen in the summoning of the Chief Secretary. - The ruling party alleged political timing before the Assembly election; conversely, ECI needed State cooperation, including nomination of officers as micro-observers [3].

Supreme Court: calibrator, not substitute - It refused to halt the drive, directing SIR to continue without hindrance [3], affirming ECI's constitutional space. - Simultaneously it read in safeguards — public display of discrepancy lists at gram panchayat bhavans and block offices for objections [4] — which ECI operationalised through fresh directions [6].

The episode shows the three institutions in calibration rather than conflict: the ECI supplying electoral hygiene, the State supplying machinery and political scrutiny, the Court supplying procedural fairness. Sustainably, roll revision must pair ECI's independence with transparent triggers, accessible appeals and pre-notified State consultation, so that Article 326's promise of universal adult franchise is deepened, not narrowed, by the pursuit of an accurate roll.

(~325 words)

Sources: 1. Special Intensive Revision (SIR) Phase-II begins in 9 States and 3 UTs — PIB — scale and BLO-led enumeration design of SIR Phase-II 2. West Bengal Identifies 15.53 Lakh Dead Voters During Special Intensive Revision — DD/Akashvani News — electoral-hygiene rationale for SIR 3. Supreme Court directs SIR of electoral rolls in West Bengal to continue without any hindrance — DD/Akashvani News — Court's refusal to halt SIR; State to furnish officers as micro-observers 4. SC directs ECI to display names of voters under logical discrepancies in West Bengal voter list — DD/Akashvani News — 1.25 crore names in the logical-discrepancy category; display at panchayat/block offices 5. ECI Appoints Four Additional Special Roll Observers to Monitor Voter List Update in West Bengal — DD News — deployment of central-service observers 6. EC issues directions to implement Supreme Court's order on SIR of electoral rolls in West Bengal — DD News — ECI operationalising judicial safeguards