New Delhi — The Election Commission of India (ECI) has firmly asserted before the Supreme Court that any judicial directive to conduct Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls at regular intervals across the country would infringe upon its constitutionally mandated autonomy. In a counter-affidavit filed in response to a public interest litigation, the Commission emphasized that it holds “complete discretion” over the timing and nature of electoral roll revisions, to the exclusion of any other authority.
The affidavit was submitted in reply to a plea by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, who sought court-mandated nationwide SIRs, particularly ahead of elections, arguing that such revisions are essential to ensure that only Indian citizens influence the country’s democratic processes.
Citing Article 324 of the Constitution, the ECI stated that the superintendence, direction, and control of elections—including the preparation and revision of electoral rolls—rests solely with the Commission. It added that this provision forms the “bedrock” of its plenary authority, even in areas where statutory law may be silent or insufficient.
The Commission also referred to Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, and Rule 25 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, which empower it to determine whether a summary or intensive revision is appropriate, based on prevailing circumstances. It clarified that the obligation to revise electoral rolls is not bound by a fixed timeline but must be fulfilled before general, assembly, or bye-elections.
The ECI highlighted its recent actions to demonstrate its commitment to maintaining the integrity of the electoral rolls. On July 5, 2025, it issued a directive to Chief Electoral Officers (CEOs) of all states and Union Territories—except Bihar—to initiate pre-revision activities for a nationwide SIR, with January 1, 2026, as the qualifying date. A national conference of CEOs was convened in New Delhi on September 10 to coordinate the exercise.
The affidavit comes amid heightened scrutiny of the SIR process in Bihar, where the Supreme Court recently directed the inclusion of Aadhaar as a valid identity document for voter verification. The court clarified that Aadhaar is not proof of citizenship but may be used to establish identity during the revision process.
The ECI urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the petition, reiterating that any externally imposed timeline or mandate for SIRs would undermine its constitutional independence and operational discretion. The matter continues to be under judicial consideration.
