SC Order on SIR Triggers TMC–BJP War Over EC’s Role in Bengal

The Trinamool Congress (TMC) has framed the Supreme Court’s decision allowing the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls to continue not as a setback, but as a procedural correction that reins in what it calls the “arbitrary overreach” of the Election Commission of India . According to the party, the core dispute was never about stopping the revision exercise itself, but about the manner of its implementation , particularly the expanding operational footprint of micro-observers in the verification structure.

TMC leaders argue that the court’s clarification restored the statutory balance of authority , making it explicit that Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) remain the only officials empowered to decide on voter inclusion or deletion . The party underscores a central principle that has now become politically significant: “Observers are meant to watch and report, not function like decision-makers.” By reiterating that observers can only assist and monitor, the Supreme Court of India reinforced what TMC calls role clarity , ensuring that supervisory personnel do not evolve into parallel decision-making authorities outside the legal chain.

The party also highlights the court taking note of West Bengal’s submission of 8,505 Group-B officers , presenting it as an institutional recalibration that integrates the state administrative machinery into the SIR framework. TMC maintains this prevents the concentration of operational influence in temporary supervisory layers and preserves accountability within the statutory hierarchy , which they say is essential for protecting genuine voters from procedural excesses or opaque scrutiny.

Politically, leaders including Mamata Banerjee and Mahua Moitra argue that their earlier warnings about potential misuse of procedural design have been validated through the court’s emphasis on legal boundaries , defined responsibilities , and institutional checks . In their telling, the order does not dilute the SIR, but ensures it proceeds under clear safeguards that reduce the scope for discretionary or unilateral actions.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) , however, has interpreted the same order as a major setback for the state government. Party leaders said the court’s insistence on uninterrupted continuation of the SIR demonstrated that attempts to portray the exercise as anti-democratic had failed. BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra described the observations as a “strong reply” to what he termed efforts to mislead the public over the revision process.

BJP figures have further alleged that the controversy surrounding the SIR stemmed from attempts to shield “ghost” or “bogus” voters in the rolls, an accusation strongly rejected by the TMC. Leaders including Amit Malviya said the order reaffirmed the statutory authority of the Election Commission and showed that constitutional institutions would not yield to political pressure, framing the development as a defence of institutional integrity rather than a procedural dispute.

The exchange has transformed the SIR into a broader institutional debate , with both parties projecting the Supreme Court’s remarks as an endorsement of their respective positions. While the court’s focus remained on procedural continuity and role clarity , the political narrative has shifted toward accountability , control of the revision mechanism , and the credibility of voter rolls ahead of future elections.

With the process underway under judicial observation, the issue has moved beyond technical revision procedures into a full-scale political contest over the credibility of electoral institutions in West Bengal, reflecting a deeper struggle over how administrative authority, legal safeguards, and democratic processes intersect.