Examine the constitutional mandate of the Election Commission of India under Article 324 in ensuring free and fair elections, with reference to recent electoral roll revision exercises.

Article 324 vests in the Election Commission of India (ECI) the superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of electoral rolls and the conduct of elections [1]. The ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) tests whether this plenary mandate, though legally valid, is also procedurally fair.

Scope of the Article 324 mandate

• Plenary and residuary: roll preparation is expressly included, allowing the ECI to fill gaps where statute is silent, since a flawed roll defeats free elections at its very source [1].
• Statutorily channelled: the Representation of the People Act, 1950 governs preparation and revision of rolls through Electoral Registration Officers acting under ECI direction [2].
• Judicially affirmed: in Association for Democratic Reforms v. ECI (2026 INSC 564, 27 May 2026), the Supreme Court upheld SIR, holding that adopting a procedure different from routine revision is not unconstitutional and that the measures secure free and fair elections [3].

Recent roll revision as exercise of the mandate

• Purity of the roll: house-to-house enumeration by Booth Level Officers, using fresh enumeration forms, to weed out deceased, duplicate and shifted entries [4].
• Phased rollout with safeguards: SIR is conducted state-wise, with draft publication and a claims-and-objections window, and schedules revised where field conditions demanded [4][5].

Concerns on fairness

• Scale of deletions: over 13 crore names struck off draft rolls has raised disenfranchisement fears, especially for poor and migrant voters lacking documents [6].
• Burden shifted to the elector: the deleted voter's only recourse is a fresh application — a reversal of natural justice [6].
• Former Election Commissioner Ashok Lavasa cautioned that justice lies in protecting the law's spirit, warning against institutions acting as though "might is right" [6].

Article 324 is thus a mandate of trust, not merely of power; legality is its floor, public confidence its test. Wider BLO capacity, transparent deletion reasons, suo motu restoration and proactive claim assistance would align SIR with the constitutional promise of universal adult franchise under Article 326.