The Supreme Court has orally observed that exclusion of a person’s name from the electoral roll pursuant to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise in West Bengal does not deprive the individual of entitlement to certain statutory welfare benefits, including subsidised food grains under the Public Distribution System (PDS).
The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana observed on Wednesday that even if a person’s name had been removed from the electoral roll, such deletion did not automatically disentitle the individual from receiving welfare benefits available under law. While dismissing a petition filed by West Bengal resident Mohibulla Mondal, the Court granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the Calcutta High Court.
The petition challenged a June 4 order issued by the West Bengal Department of Food and Supplies directing verification and deletion of PDS beneficiaries following the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. The petitioner sought directions restraining the authorities from deleting, cancelling or suspending his ration card and discontinuing the supply of subsidised food grains until his statutory appeal against exclusion from the electoral roll is decided by the Appellate Tribunal.
The Bench also requested the Appellate Tribunal constituted pursuant to the Supreme Court’s earlier directions to dispose of the petitioner’s appeal challenging his exclusion from the electoral roll expeditiously, preferably within two months. It clarified that if the petitioner’s grievances are not fully redressed after the appellate proceedings, he would be at liberty to seek appropriate relief before the High Court.
Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat, appearing for the petitioner, urged the Supreme Court to clarify that deletion from the electoral roll cannot be treated as a declaration that a person is not an Indian citizen, pointing out that similar issues were likely to arise in several cases. The Bench observed that it was confident the High Courts would correctly apply the legal position already settled by the Supreme Court and indicated that, if necessary, it would clarify the issue in future cases.
The petitioner submitted that he had been holding a valid ration card since 2016 and that his appeal against deletion from the electoral roll is currently pending before the Appellate Tribunal. He contended that cancellation of his ration card solely because of exclusion from the electoral roll was legally unsustainable.
The plea argued that deletion from the electoral roll cannot be equated with a determination of citizenship and cannot be used as the basis for depriving a person of statutory entitlements under the National Food Security Act, 2013. It contended that the right to food and the right to vote operate in distinct legal spheres and are governed by separate statutory frameworks.
According to the petition, while electoral eligibility was regulated under election laws, eligibility for subsidised food grains was governed by the National Food Security Act (NFSA), which prescribed an independent mechanism for identification of beneficiaries and did not authorise cancellation of ration cards merely because of exclusion from the electoral roll.
The petition further argued that linking electoral roll deletion with cancellation of food security benefits violates the fundamental right to life and dignity guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
It also alleged that the June 4 order required area inspectors to complete the verification exercise within only 11 days, creating a substantial risk of arbitrary and mechanical deletion of beneficiaries without adequate scrutiny, notice or an opportunity of hearing, thereby violating the principles of natural justice.
The petitioner relied on the Supreme Court’s recent judgment upholding the Special Intensive Revision exercise in Bihar, in which the Court categorically held that deletion of a person’s name from the electoral roll does not amount to a declaration that the individual is not an Indian citizen.
The Court had clarified that the Election Commission of India is not the competent authority to conclusively determine questions of citizenship under the Citizenship Act. It had further held that the legal consequence of exclusion from the electoral roll is confined to the loss of voting rights and other electoral entitlements, and does not extinguish citizenship claims or affect rights that fall outside the electoral framework.
A public interest litigation challenging the West Bengal government’s decision to deny ration benefits to persons excluded during the Special Intensive Revision exercise is presently pending before the Calcutta High Court.
The post Electoral roll exclusion in West Bengal SIR does not bar PDS ration benefits: Supreme Court appeared first on India Legal.