Examine the constitutional mandate of the Election Commission of India in conducting Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. Discuss the safeguards needed to balance roll purity with the right to vote.

Article 324 vests in the Election Commission of India (ECI) the superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of electoral rolls, while Article 326 makes adult suffrage the constitutional default. Special Intensive Revision (SIR) sits precisely between these two commands — purity of the roll on one side, inclusion of every eligible elector on the other.

The mandate: wide but conditional

• Source of power: the Supreme Court, deciding petitions challenging SIR's legality (May 2026), traced the exercise to Article 324 and Section 21(3), RP Act 1950, holding intensive revision essential to credible elections [1][2].
• Duty, not discretion: Section 22 obliges the Electoral Registration Officer to correct the roll — but only after inquiry, and only on defined grounds: death, ceasing to be ordinarily resident, or not otherwise entitled [2].
• Outer limit: the Court clarified the ECI may examine citizenship for electoral purposes but cannot finally determine citizenship [1].
• Execution gap: in West Bengal, of over 60 lakh names scrutinised, nearly 27 lakh were marked ineligible under the umbrella label "logical discrepancies" [3] — a data-matching phrase, not a statutory ground, prompting the Court to direct that such names be displayed [4].

Safeguards to balance purity with the vote

• Real hearing at the field stage: Rule 23, Registration of Electors Rules 1960, bars appeal where the voter did not use the right to be heard — so the ERO hearing must be substantive, not formal [5].
• Independent appeal: the statutory appeal under Section 24 lies to the District Magistrate — the same administrative chain; hence the 19 Appellate Tribunals under retired judges, constituted on the Court's orders [6].
• Time-bound disposal with rolling supplementary rolls, since pendency confers no right to vote [4].
• Cost neutrality: the Section 25 appeal fee is never refunded [2]; it should be waived where deletion is reversed.
• Transparency: ground-wise publication of deletions, and disclosure of reversal ratios from the earlier Bihar round.

Roll purity and the franchise are complementary, not competing, goals: a clean roll protects the vote only if no genuine elector is removed without proof. Institutionalising reasoned deletion orders, judicially-led appeals and continuous roll updation would let the ECI discharge its Article 324 mandate while honouring the promise of Article 326.