PANAJI
The election officials relied on a recent Supreme Court judgment upholding the Election Commission’s power to conduct a Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, telling the High Court of Bombay at Goa that voters left out of the draft roll during the enumeration exercise still had a statutory route to get their names included before the final roll was published.
The Election Commission’s legal representative in Goa, Advocate Gaurish Agni, submitted to the Division Bench of Justice Valmiki Menezes and Justice Amit Jamsandekar, which is hearing a writ petition filed by a St Cruz family challenging the non-inclusion of their names in the electoral roll.
Agni referred to the Supreme Court’s May 27 judgment in which a Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi upheld the legality of the SIR conducted in Bihar. The court held that the Election Commission had the power to conduct the exercise under Article 324 of the Constitution, read with Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1950. Relying on the judgment and the procedure adopted during the SIR, Agni told the High Court Bench that failure to submit an enumeration form did not permanently shut the door on a voter. “During the enumeration period, those who did not submit the form would not have their names included in the draft roll, as per the guidelines. The same procedure was followed in Goa. However, if a name was left out because the form was not submitted, the voter still has an opportunity during the claims and objections period to submit Form 6, along with proper address proof, for inclusion of the name,” he submitted. He said such applications could be considered between the filing of the claim and publication of the final electoral roll and, if the applicant was found eligible, the name could be included. The Bench was also told about the case of Paresh Salgaonkar, whose residential address was changed and had filled Form 8 without submitting an enumeration form.
Agni argued that Form 8 was meant for an existing voter seeking a change of address, and that Salgaonkar had shifted his address about eight years earlier but had not informed the election authorities of the change before the SIR. “No enumeration form was given during the enumeration period... when the address is not valid, how can you process a change of address? That is why his form was rejected,” Agni said. He maintained that the Commission's position remained that exclusion from the electoral roll did not prevent an eligible person from seeking inclusion. “Even today, it is the Commission’s stand that any voter whose name is not included should fill the requisite form with address proof. It would be considered and, if eligible, the name would be included in the final electoral roll,” he said.
The Bench, which has been holding a marathon hearing into the matter, will further hear arguments on Monday, October 5.
