The Delhi High Court has dismissed a PIL seeking directions to the Election Commission of India (ECI) to create a special mechanism for enrolling, retaining or transposing the names of homeless persons and those displaced by demolition drives during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Delhi.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia held that the ECI’s existing mechanism for inclusion of homeless persons in the electoral rolls was adequate and was already being implemented. The Court therefore found no “vacuum” warranting the directions sought in the petition.
The PIL was filed by Indu Prakash Singh, who raised concerns that persons rendered homeless or displaced following demolition drives could be excluded from the electoral rolls because Booth Level Officers (BLOs), during the SIR exercise, were required to visit addresses recorded in the previous electoral roll. It was argued that where the recorded premises had been demolished, such voters could be marked as shifted or absent, while homeless persons could face difficulties establishing their ordinary residence.
The petitioner sought, among other things, a special facilitative mechanism for homeless and demolition-affected persons, identification of such persons, relaxation of procedural requirements, field verification by BLOs, special enrolment camps and dedicated grievance-redressal mechanisms.
The ECI opposed the plea, pointing to Chapter 8 of its March 2023 Manual on Electoral Rolls. Clause 8.5 specifically provides for enrolment of homeless persons and pavement dwellers who do not possess documentary proof of ordinary residence. Under the procedure, a BLO can visit the address provided in Form 6 for more than one night to verify that the person actually resides there.
The ECI also informed the Court that persons affected by demolition could approach the ECI or the concerned District BLO and seek inclusion by furnishing their new address through Form 6. The BLO would then verify the person’s residence at the new location.
The High Court noted that the ECI had placed on record an extract of the Draft Electoral Roll showing homeless persons, including their names, photographs, age and gender, with “0” recorded in the house-number column. According to the Court, this demonstrated that the mechanism for including homeless persons was in fact being implemented during the SIR exercise.
The Bench further observed that the petitioner had made broad allegations regarding the exclusion of demolition-affected homeless persons but had not provided particulars or numbers of persons who continued to remain excluded from the electoral roll.
Holding that the existing mechanism was sufficient, the Court said that a person excluded from the electoral roll due to demolition or relocation could use Form 6, following which the BLO would undertake the prescribed verification. It therefore concluded that a separate special mechanism was not required.
The Court ultimately held that none of the prayers in the PIL warranted grant and dismissed the petition, while also disposing of the pending application.
