New Delhi: The petition filed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi and 10 prominent opposition leaders following a massive march October 12 was not listed for hearing in the Supreme Court Tuesday as defects pointed out by the registry are yet to be cured.
As per the Supreme Court’s website, the apex court registry had flagged 14 defects, including lack of a clear copy of the ID card of Congress president and Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge, a co-petitioner in the case.
The registry had also pointed out certain illegible or missing pages in the petition.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, in his response to Gandhi’s request for a meeting to submit a memorandum on issues concerning the Chief Election Commissioner and the Election Commission, the alleged arbitrary arrest of several students, closure of Metro stations and cancellation of trains, had assured early hearing of the plea, if filed, on the judicial side.
Tuesday, a bench headed by the CJI assured the petitioners that their matters would be listed for hearing if the defects are cured.
We will list all these matters. Make sure that the defects are cured, the CJI told senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, who mentioned the matter on behalf of a journalist.
Besides Gandhi and Kharge, TMC MP Saugata Roy, Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav, Rashtriya Janata Dal leader Tejashwi Prasad Yadav, Nationalist Congress Party (Sharad Pawar) leader Supriya Sule, Shiv Sena-UBT leader Sanjay Raut, Communist Party of India’s D Raja, Jharkhand Mukti Morcha MP Mahua Majhi, CPI(M) general secretary M A Baby and Indian Union Muslim League leader E T Mohammed Basheer are co-petitioners in the plea filed by the Congress leader.
The plea has alleged large-scale voter deletions and irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
It has sought the constitution of an independent committee, headed by a retired apex court judge and assisted by technical experts and other citizens of eminence, to conduct a time-bound, independent audit of deletions and modifications made during the SIR.
It has also sought a direction to ensure that no elector is deleted from the electoral rolls without notice and a reasonable opportunity of hearing in accordance with the law, and also to ensure that eligible persons in Punjab and other states going to polls are permitted to seek inclusion in the electoral rolls until the last date permitted by law.
Issue an interim direction suspending the ongoing Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls across the states, pending consideration and adjudication of the issues raised in the present petition, in the interests of protecting the rights of eligible electors and preserving the integrity of the electoral process, the plea said.
The petition has made the Election Commission of India, Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi parties in the case.
The petition has sought direction to the poll panel to place on record the complete files, agendas, minutes, notings and objections recorded by the Election Commissioners in respect of each of the disputed decisions relating to the SIR of electoral rolls, together with the relevant ECINET and ERONET access logs and the complete files recording the decision June 24, 2025, to commence the SIR exercise across the country.
It has sought a direction to examine whether the disputed decisions relating to the SIR were taken in compliance with Article 324 of the Constitution, Section 18 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, and the law declared by the apex court.
Article 324 vests the superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of electoral rolls and the conduct of elections in the Election Commission.
The plea said if any of the decisions were taken without lawful authority, it must be quashed.
Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction asking the competent authorities to take appropriate action against the persons responsible for any breach of the constitutional or statutory provisions governing the preparation and revision of electoral rolls, including under Section 32 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, wherever warranted, it said.
The plea also sought a direction to the poll panel to ensure that online Form 6 conforms to the form prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, unless and until the said Rules are lawfully amended in accordance with the applicable procedure.
It sought a direction for publishing, booth-wise, the names of all electors deleted during the SIR, the reasons for each deletion and a breakdown of deletions by gender and age, and to provide an effective and functional mechanism to restore the names of electors found eligible for inclusion in the voter list.
Earlier, the CJI had declined a request by Kharge and Gandhi for a meeting to submit a memorandum.
Convening a meeting on issues that are sub judice would contravene the principle of separation of powers and is incompatible with established ethics and judicial propriety, the CJI wrote to Gandhi and Kharge.
