The Election Commission of India (ECI) is moving forward with a nationwide Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, aiming for uniform implementation across states and union territories. While the Commission maintains a top-down strategy to bolster electoral integrity, the actual execution varies widely, revealing sharp political and procedural contrasts on the ground. Clearly all political parties, especially the Opposition have not been consulted in the formulation of this exercise. Neither have citizen’s organisations committed to the deepening of Indian democracy.
These divergences were evident during the ECI’s third Conference of Chief Electoral Officers (CEOs), held on September 10, 2025, at the India International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Management (IIIDEM), New Delhi. Chief Election Commissioner Shri Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Dr. Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Dr. Vivek Joshi assessed state-wise readiness. CEOs presented updates on elector counts, digitisation progress, voter mapping, and polling station rationalisation—capped at 1,200 electors per booth.
ECI holds conference of Chief Electoral Officers of all States/UTs to assess
preparedness for nationwide SIRRead more : https://t.co/nZ9mVaBY7g pic.twitter.com/8QdkGBEWi0
— Election Commission of India (@ECISVEEP) September 10, 2025
Why the different approaches of the ECI’s SIR in Bihar and West Bengal?
The ECI is clearly applying varied approaches to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, with the methodology and parameters in each state appearing to be influenced by specific legal and historical contexts. While the ECI’s stated and overarching goal is a single, nationwide exercise, the on-the-ground implementation reveals significant procedural differences from one state to another.
Parameters of the Bihar SIR: legal and procedural re-enumeration
The approach to the SIR in Bihar is defined by two key parameters, a comprehensive house-to-house (H2H) enumeration and a documentation process under judicial direction. Burden has been placed on the individual elector to ‘submit’ her/his form, in duplicate (though complaints have surfaced that only single forms have been supplied, rendering the efficacy or intent behind the house-to-house survey questionable. The methodology, as outlined by the Chief Electoral Officer of Bihar, requires a complete re-enumeration of voters, with Booth-Level Officers (BLOs) visiting every household multiple time to distribute and collect pre-filled forms. This process is not a simple update but an attempt to rebuild the voter list from scratch. Conduct of some of the BLOs—and the short time span and pressure put on them –has also raised more questions than what the ECI has been inclined to answer.
The June 24 notification from the ECI outlined a mixed motive of the ECI in the entire exercise. Apart from this being sudden and hurried –especially given that a revision of rolls for the poll-bound state had already taken place in January 2025—the wording of the notification clearly indicated that the poll body was stepping outside of its statutory mandate and actually assessing/evaluating people’s citizenship.
The Election Commission, in its June 24 order stated that “in case ERO/AERO doubts the eligibility of the proposed Elector (due to non-submission of requisite documents or otherwise), he/she will start a suo moto inquiry and issue notice to such proposed Elector, as to why his/her should not be deleted. Based on field inquiry, documentation or otherwise, ERO/AERO shall decide on inclusion of such proposed Electors in the Final Rolls. In each such case, ERO/AERO shall pass a speaking order. Also, EROs will refer cases of suspected foreign nationals to the competent authority under the Citizenship Act, 1955. For these purposes, AERO shall exercise ERO’s powers independently u/s 13C(2) of the RPA, 1950.”
Following the outrage caused in the launching of this exercise and several challenges to the Bihar SIR posed by organisations like the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR) and political players, the course of the exercise changed.
Crucially, now, the documentation parameter in Bihar is being shaped by the Supreme Court. While the ECI initially sought a list of 11 indicative documents to be submitted by individual electors, the court directed the inclusion of Aadhaar as the 12th prescribed document at its last hearing on September 8, 2025. This court order mandates that Aadhaar can be used as a standalone form of identity, a significant deviation from the ECI’s original plan and a parameter that has been set by legal intervention rather than the poll body alone. This makes the Bihar model a test case for how judicial oversight can directly influence the operational details of the SIR.
Despite initial reservations regarding the acceptability of Aadhaar, the Supreme Court, in its order dated September 8, 2025, clarified the legal position on its use for electoral purposes. The Court stated:
“The short issue pertains to the acceptability and status of the Aadhaar card. In view of the statutory status assigned to Aadhaar under the Aadhaar Act, the Aadhaar card is not proof of citizenship. However, keeping in view Section 23(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, the Aadhaar card is one of the documents that may be used to establish the identity of a person. Learned Senior Counsel for the Election Commission of India (ECI) has confirmed that the Aadhaar card shall be taken into consideration as one of the documents for establishing identity for inclusion or exclusion in the revised voter list for Bihar.”
The Court further held that the Aadhaar card shall be treated as the 12th document for identity verification purposes by the authorities, authorities are entitled to verify the authenticity and genuineness of the Aadhaar card, Aadhaar shall not be accepted as proof of citizenship and the ECI shall issue relevant instructions accordingly.
In compliance with the Supreme Court’s direction, the Election Commission of India issued instructions to the Chief Electoral Officer, Bihar, on September 9, 2025, regarding the use of Aadhaar during the Special Summary Revision (SIR). Aadhaar shall be treated as the 12th document for establishing identity, in addition to the 11 documents listed in Annexure C and D of the SIR Order dated June 24, 2025; it is to be accepted solely as proof of identity and not as proof of citizenship, in line with Section 9 of the Aadhaar Act, 2016. Under Section 23(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, Aadhaar is already recognized as a valid identity document. DEOs, EROs, AEROs, and all concerned authorities were directed to ensure strict compliance, with any refusal to accept Aadhaar being treated with utmost seriousness.
ECI’s instruction on Aadhaar dated 09.09.2025 can be read here
The question that now arises is has the Supreme Court’s cautionary orders to the constitutional body governed its approach on electoral roll revision in Bengal? Then again comes the question, how come and on what justification has the ECI chosen selectively different parameters for the electoral poll revision in Assam?
Parameters of the West Bengal SIR: historical mapping and administrative overhaul
In West Bengal, the Election Commission of India (ECI) has adopted a distinct approach to the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), anchored in a historical baseline. Rather than initiating a fresh enumeration, the ECI has ordered a house-to-house mapping exercise to cross-check the current electoral roll against the 2002 list—the last time an intensive revision was conducted in the state.
Booth-level officers (BLOs) have been tasked with visiting households of voters listed in the 2002 roll to verify if they still appear on the draft rolls for 2025. Electors will be informed of their original number (booth or constituency) and serial numbers, while children of those voters—if enrolled after 2002—can use their parents’ details during the upcoming SIR. BLOs will also record information about unregistered children of 2002 voters to streamline their inclusion.
According to the Telegraph, “The BLOs will verify each name on the current electoral rolls with the 2002 rolls. Those whose names figure in both the lists will not be required to submit any other documents. Their children, if they were enrolled after 2002, will also be able to use their parents’ details to fill in the forms during the SIR. The BLOs will also note down the details of the children of the 2002 electors in case they were not enrolled that year,” said a source.
Alongside this groundwork, the ECI has directed a significant administrative shift, the delinking of the Chief Electoral Officer’s office from the state’s Home and Hill Affairs Department and its relocation to Central Government premises. This move purportedly underscores the Commission’s concern over electoral integrity and highlights its intention to ensure a neutral administrative environment before launching the full-scale revision.
Delhi: on standby
Despite no imminent polls, Delhi’s electoral machinery is in high gear. Officials are training BLOs and rationalising polling stations as part of advanced-stage preparations.
“We want to be prepared whenever the exercise is launched,” an official stated, aligning with the ECI’s directive for all states to be SIR-ready, the Rediff reported. Ironically while some select media outlets have disclosed details of these varied, distinctive methodologies in the revisions, there appears to be no officially disclosed statement of the ECI endorsing these.
Assam: citizenship and political overtones
In Assam, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) has taken on a distinctly political tone, closely tied to the state’s long-standing debates around citizenship and alleged “illegal entries” in voter rolls. With assembly elections expected early next year—marking the first since the redrawing of all 126 constituencies in 2023—the urgency is palpable. The ECI notification is available on social media and may be read here.
Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma has positioned the SIR as a crucial step toward cleansing the electoral rolls, citing opposition comments as inadvertent justification for the revision. The last intensive revision in the state took place in 2005, and the updated voter list from that year is now being circulated among political parties, reported the TOI.
To meet the tight timeline, on August 4, 2025, Assam’s Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) Anurag Goel has issued a high-priority directive instructing all district election officers to ensure full preparedness within 15 to 20 days, ahead of the Election Commission’s official schedule announcement. This includes confirming the deployment of electoral registration officers (EROs), assistant EROs, and booth-level officers (BLOs), along with identifying additional BLOs for newly formed polling stations, as reported.
The directive also prohibits reassigning election personnel or data entry staff to other duties—especially in the Bodoland Territorial Council areas, which are simultaneously gearing up for autonomous council elections, likely in September.
Bihar: judicial oversight as a national test case
Bihar’s SIR, considered the model for the national rollout, is under the microscope of the Supreme Court. Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi have warned that any legal irregularity in Bihar could jeopardise the entire nationwide exercise. The Supreme Court clarified that the publication of the final voter list would not affect the adjudication of the matter, assuring the petitioners that it would step in if any illegality were found. “What difference will it (the final publication of the list) make to us? If we are satisfied there is some illegality, we can…,” Justice Kant remarked, as reported by Live Law.
The court has scheduled final arguments for October 7 and emphasised that its verdict will apply pan-India.
The Court has also intervened on documentation as Aadhaar has now been mandated as the 12th acceptable identity document, despite ECI’s initial reluctance. While not proof of citizenship, the court clarified it can be verified for authenticity, thereby adding a critical layer of judicially enforced uniformity to an otherwise flexible process.
A ‘unified’ framework, applied differentially
The ECI is attempting to manage a multifaceted, nationwide exercise with a consistent approach, but the ground-level implementation reveals significant variations. The ECI’s conference with CEOs on September 10, 2025, confirmed its plan to roll out the SIR with a “single schedule.” The ECI’s press note from that day further details this strategy, mentioning a review of documents to ensure “ease of submission” for eligible citizens and a focus on “rationalisation of polling stations” to have no more than 1,200 electors per booth.
However, the ECI’s actions in West Bengal, with its emphasis on a 2002-based mapping exercise, stand in contrast to the broader, more exclusivist approach discussed at the CEO conference. While ECI sources stated that the “SIR order of June 24 holds for entire country,” they also hinted that the “list of documents could be made more inclusive when the schedule was announced,” suggesting a potential for state-specific adaptations.
The Election Commission’s push to delink the CEO’s office in West Bengal from state government control—invoking the Representation of the People Act, 1950—raises questions about consistency in administrative principles. West Bengal, governed by the opposition party TMC, has long had a tense relationship with the ECI, and this move appears to reflect a deeper tension rather than a neutral policy shift. Is the emphasis on administrative “independence” truly about institutional integrity—or is it shaped by the political context of an opposition-ruled state?
This apparent paradox – a single, unified plan with state-specific execution—is a defining characteristic of the ECI’s current movement. The national training program for BLOs promotes uniformity in understanding the SIR module, yet the pre-revision activities across states tell a different story. Manipur, Sikkim, Mizoram, Goa, and Arunachal Pradesh have each conducted state-specific consultations or training sessions, reflecting a decentralised pattern. However, most of these states are either governed by the BJP or its allies, casting doubt on whether this flexibility is uniformly available. The framing of these variations as tailored administrative responses should be viewed critically—especially when similar room for adaptation appears contested in states with non-BJP governments.
This approach, while perhaps practical, also raises questions about whether the final electoral rolls will be a truly uniform product, or a collection of lists prepared under different, albeit ECI-approved, methodologies.
Related
89 lakh complaints of irregularities during Bihar SIR were rejected by ECI: Congress
Bihar SIR: New elector applications doubled in just 2 days, showing a 96.6% increase
99.8% of 65 lakh voter deletions go unchallenged on 13th day of objection period