Tamil Nadu SIR: Supreme Court asks ECI to publish names with "logical discrepancies" objection

The Supreme Court has asked the Election Commission of India to publish names of people against whom a "logical discrepancy" objection has been raised during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Tamil Nadu.

A CJI Surya Kant led bench has directed that "the names of those who appear are allowed to submit documents in person or through authorised representatives within 10 days from displaying the list of logical discrepancy list which will also contain brief reason of discrepancy."

Earlier, Supreme Court had issued a set of directions to ease the pressure on Booth Level Officers (BLOs) engaged in the Special Summary Revision (SIR) process in Tamil Nadu, after observing that several state employees were facing “extreme difficulties” while being deployed for election-related duties.

One of the petitioners, the Tamizhaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), had earlier highlighted instances of severe work pressure, including cases where BLOs allegedly died by suicide due to the overwhelming workload.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for TVK, had argued that BLOs were being compelled to work late into the night, despite already juggling full-time teaching or anganwadi duties. He flagged the invocation of Section 32 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, which permits criminal action when election duties are not performed, contending that such harsh measures were driving employees to distress. He cited the case of a young man who was denied leave for his own wedding and later died by suicide.

Issuing interim directions, the Supreme Court had mandated:

1. States must deploy additional staff so that working hours of BLOs are reduced.
2. Any employee seeking exemption for personal reasons must be considered on a case-to-case basis and suitably replaced by alternate personnel.

3. State governments remain obligated to supply adequate workforce to the ECI but may increase the strength to mitigate hardships.

Previously, the ECI had told the Supreme Court that the petitions filed by Communist Party of India (Marxist) and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Tamil Nadu are aimed at creating narratives to serve vested political interests.

ECI had further stated that to ensure that the SIR exercise is conducted in a seamless manner and with optimal efficiency, as regards the State of Tamil Nadu, it has appointed 68,470 BLOs. Moreover, recognized National and State Political Parties have appointed more than 2,38,853 BLAs to provide assistance to the process and maintain oversight.

CPI(M) and DMK had approached the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Tamil Nadu. The petition filed by Secretary of the CPI(M) Tamil Nadu State Committee, P. Shanmugam, seeks to quash the ECI's order dated 27 October 2025, which has mandated completion of the SIR exercise within a month. Court was told that he SIR has no statutory basis and amounts to a “colourable exercise of power” by the Election Commission. DMK  argued that the SIR orders based on the order and guidelines issued on 24.06.2025 of the ECI if not set aside, can arbitrarily and without due process disenfranchise lakhs of voters from electing their representatives, thereby disrupting free and fair elections and democracy in the country, which are part of the basic structure of the Constitution, Supreme Court had been told.

The order of ECI dated October 27, 2025 has directed for an SIR to be conducted in various States and Union Territories such as the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Chhattisgarh, Goa, Gujarat, Kerala, Lakshadweep, Madhya Pradesh, Puducherry, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and the State of Tamil Nadu.

Case Title: Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam v. Election Commission of India

Hearing Date: January 29, 2026

Bench: CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi