ERO Can Decide Voter Eligibility Micro-Observers No Final Say
Election Commission to Supreme Court
-
EC said micro-observers are only facilitators, not decision-makers.
-
Mamata Banerjee argued Bengal is being “singled out” by appointing 8,100 Central officers.
-
EC denied allegations of bias, saying micro-observers work under the State CEO’s control.
-
Over 1 crore voters asked to submit extra documents; Anganwadi family registers rejected as valid
GG News Bureau
New Delhi 9th February :The Election Commission of India (ECI) has firmly told the Supreme Court that micro-observers deployed during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in West Bengal have no authority to accept or reject voters. Responding to petitions filed by Trinamool Congress leaders, including Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, the poll body said the legal power to add or delete names from the voter list lies solely with the Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and Assistant EROs.
The controversy erupted after over one crore voters in West Bengal were asked to submit additional documents to establish their eligibility, including proof of citizenship. Opposition leaders alleged that the appointment of around 8,100 Central government and PSU officials as micro-observers indicated political targeting of the state. Mamata Banerjee, who appeared personally before the court, argued that such large-scale deployment in Bengal — and not in other states undergoing SIR — raised serious questions about fairness and intent.
In its affidavit, the ECI rejected the allegation of bias, stating that micro-observers are working on deputation and remain under the administrative control of the State Chief Electoral Officer. Their role, the Commission clarified, is limited to facilitating ground-level processes such as checking whether documents have been collected and procedures followed properly. “Statutory powers remain with EROs,” the EC underlined, adding that it is false to claim that micro-observers are re-verifying or overruling decisions.
The Commission also pointed out that it had to deploy Central officers as micro-observers because the state administration did not spare enough officials for the SIR exercise. This claim is likely to intensify the political face-off between the Centre and the Bengal government. Meanwhile, civil society groups and voters have raised concerns over the stress caused by repeated documentation demands, especially for migrant workers, the elderly, and marginalised communities.
Another contentious issue flagged by the EC is the rejection of Anganwadi family registers as valid documents for the SIR process. The Commission said such registers cannot be treated as proof of citizenship or eligibility, a decision that may impact thousands of families who rely on local welfare records.
As the Supreme Court continues hearing the matter, the outcome is expected to have significant implications for voter verification exercises across the country, especially in politically sensitive states ahead of elections.
