The Supreme Court on 27 October granted petitioners 10 days to file a rejoinder to the Election Commission affidavit defending the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. The direction was given during a hearing in New Delhi, and it set the next step in the case over the revision exercise. A rejoinder is a reply filed by petitioners to a response filed by the other side, and in this case it will respond to the points made by the Election Commission in its affidavit. The SIR case has drawn attention because the revision of electoral rolls affects the list of voters used in elections.
The bench hearing the case comprised Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana. Senior advocate Vikas Singh appeared for the first petitioner, Rakesh Kumar Singh, and the bench asked him to file the rejoinder in 10 days. The Election Commission response to which the rejoinder will reply was submitted late on 26 October. The timing of the filing meant petitioners had the Commission reply in hand when the bench took up the matter on 27 October, and the 10 day period gave them time to prepare a point by point reply.
The Election Commission affidavit runs to 248 pages. In it, the Commission defended the Special Intensive Revision and maintained that the exercise was authorised by law. The affidavit also stated that the orders linked to the revision were approved unanimously by all three members of the Commission. The Commission response was filed in a petition against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the decisions taken by the Commission. The affidavit rejected the claim that the statutory Form 6 used for voter registration had been amended.
SIR affidavit and the Form 6 question
Form 6 is the form used for voter registration, and the question of whether it was changed became a central point in the SIR hearing. The Election Commission affidavit maintained that the statutory Form 6 was not amended. The affidavit was filed by Deputy Election Commissioner Bhanu Prakash Yeturu on behalf of the Commission. The Commission also stated that the affidavit itself had been approved by a unanimous decision of all three members of the poll panel. The point on unanimous approval was part of the Commission defence of how its decisions were taken.
Senior advocate Maneka Guruswamy appeared for Dola Sen. She said the Commission had wrongly claimed that changes to Form 6 were approved by the Supreme Court. The argument put before the bench was that approval by the court had been claimed where no such approval existed for the changes in question. The Commission position, as set out in its affidavit, was that the statutory Form 6 had not been amended. The two positions on Form 6 therefore stood apart when the bench issued notice on the fresh plea.
SIR hearing and the bench direction
Chief Justice Surya Kant said all issues would be examined. The statement was made while issuing notice on the Dola Sen plea, and it indicated that the bench would look at the points raised by both sides rather than deciding the Form 6 question at that stage. Courts often issue notice and set a timetable for replies before taking up detailed arguments, and the direction for a rejoinder in 10 days followed that pattern. The rejoinder will allow petitioners to answer the Commission affidavit in full, including its defence of the SIR and its stand on Form 6.
What the SIR case moves to next
The next step in the SIR case is the filing of the rejoinder by petitioners within 10 days from 27 October. Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the first petitioner Rakesh Kumar Singh, will file the rejoinder to the Election Commission affidavit submitted late on 26 October. The rejoinder will respond to the Commission defence that the SIR was authorised by law, that its orders were approved unanimously by all three members, and that the statutory Form 6 was not amended.
Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana will hear the matters after the replies are filed. The court has not yet decided the questions raised about the SIR, the approval of Commission orders, or Form 6. The 10 day period for the rejoinder, the notice on the Dola Sen plea, and the statement that all issues would be examined together set the timetable for the next stage of the SIR case in the Supreme Court.