The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) procedure for conducting the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in the state. This decision came on Tuesday, with the court emphasizing the ECI’s capabilities to handle procedural challenges within its specialized domain. The case, titled Devanura Mahadeva & Ors v Election Commission of India, was presided over by Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice KS Hemalekha.
The court noted that the Election Commission is the appropriate authority to address any issues that might arise during the SIR process. “The ECI is tasked with the conduct of SIR and it is a specialized body. We find no reasons to proceed on the basis that the ECI would not be able to address procedural issues it may encounter during the conduct of SIR. The question whether the timelines are sufficient to complete the task is a matter that is within the specialized domain of the ECI. It would not be apposite for this Court to determine this issue at this stage,” read the court’s observation.
Senior Advocate Vikram Huilgol, representing the petitioners, argued that the proposed timeline to complete the SIR was questionable. Concerns were raised about the adequacy of the 10-day training program for anganwadi workers and teachers responsible for the house-to-house SIR, and their role in assisting voters with form completion. The petitioners feared these issues might lead to errors or the unwarranted removal of voters.
Furthermore, the petitioners contested the lack of notice to citizens prior to the draft electoral rolls’ publication. In defense, Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty, representing the state, pointed out that the state cabinet had already submitted a detailed representation to the ECI on these concerns on June 15, 2026. The court acknowledged this representation, stating, “The State has already made representation in this regard and we find ground to assume that the same would be given the consideration the said representation deserves. At this stage, we find the present petition is premature and therefore decline to entertain the same.”
The ECI’s counsel informed the court that other High Courts, including those in Sikkim and Delhi, have also refrained from entertaining similar petitions. He mentioned that the Supreme Court is currently hearing related issues and assured the court that the ECI is mindful of the timeline and prepared to extend it if necessary. He clarified that notices to voters could only be issued after the draft roll’s publication, allowing voters until September 16, 2026, to respond, with all cases resolved by October 15, 2026.
More Read
Given that the Supreme Court is addressing related matters, the Karnataka High Court decided not to rule on the issues that are sub-judice. “We also note the contention advanced by the ECI, that petitions raising similar issues are pending before the Supreme Court. For this reason also, this would not be necessary for this Court to examine the issues raised at the present stage. The writ petition is disposed off,” the court stated.
In dismissing the petition, the court noted that the petitioners’ concerns were speculative, based on potential problems following the draft rolls’ publication. Huilgol also referenced a statement by Chief Minister DK Shivakumar, indicating that deletions from the electoral rolls could negatively impact beneficiaries of welfare schemes. The court responded, “Nothing has happened, persons have not been denied their welfare schemes now you are assuming first their names will be excluded on the basis they will be denied welfare schemes.”
