NEW DELHI

Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and Assistant Electoral Registration Officers (AEROs) were named as ‘objectors’ for as many as 25 voters among thousands of objections filed against electors in Delhi’s draft roll, according to an analysis of Form 10 reports — a public list of all objections to the inclusion of names in electoral rolls — between September 21 and 27.

These were the only entries among the 1,997 electors whose names were objected to using Form 7 during the seven-day period in which the ‘reason’ column was left blank.

The 25 include 12 objections in Sadar Bazar, three of them by EROs; seven in Malviya Nagar; four in Chhattarpur; and one each in Kirari and Vikaspuri.

All 25 electors had been flagged for notices for either a ‘logical discrepancy’ or ‘no mapping’ in the draft roll published on August 31.

Former Election Commissioner Ashok Lavasa said while the practice of EROs and AEROs filing Form 7s was “unheard of”, using the form to initiate an inquiry could be a “technical requirement” and would not in itself be “illegal” if followed up by due process.

The cases form part of the 4,401 objections received during the claims and objections phase of the ongoing special intensive revision (SIR) drive in Delhi.

Response of officials

When reached for comment on why they had filed the objections, the EROs and AEROs concerned cited reasons such as deaths, field-verification reports by Booth Level Officers (BLOs), complaints from relatives and cases where electors did not appear for notice hearings.

“An objection does not mean deletion of a voter’s name. It is part of the verification process in which electors receive notices and get 15 days to respond on why their names should not be removed,” said an ERO.

Mala Sood, an ERO from Sadar Bazar, said, “This is merely an objection, which could be due to various reasons, including the voter’s death or based on BLO reports. No deletion will happen without verification. A mandatory notice is generated and sent again to the elector.”

The Hindu had on September 27 reported that around 32 electors in Sadar Bazar were marked ‘ineligible’ out of a total of 350 such cases in Delhi for not appearing for hearings or not submitting required documents.

Officials in Malviya Nagar said the objections were raised against the names of ‘ineligible’ voters. “This was done based on a BLO field report, according to which the elector was not at their registered address when the BLO visited to deliver the SIR notice,” an official said.

Form 7 is used to seek deletion of an existing name or to object to the inclusion of a name on grounds such as death, duplicate enrolment, non-citizenship, absence or having permanently shifted. The onus of proof is on the objector, who must be an elector in the same constituency.

What rules say

While the Election Commission’s (EC) Manual on Electoral Rolls 2023 and SIR guidelines are silent on whether an ERO and an AERO can raise objections through Form 7s, EROs are empowered to initiate an inquiry based on BLO reports to examine whether a name should be deleted. The deletion must follow an inquiry, and a reason must be cited for the action. An ERO exercises final authority over the preparation of the roll and decides on all claims and objections.

The Hindu sent queries to Delhi Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) Ashok Kumar’s office on whether EROs and AEROs are expected to use Form 7 to initiate suo motu inquiry. No response was received till the time of going to press.

‘Could be formality’

“If the official concerned has followed it [filing of Form 7] up with an inquiry, he could be fulfilling a technical formality. Although I am not sure whether the technical formality was required,” said Mr. Lavasa.

The deadline for filing claims and objections is October 30 while the final electoral roll is scheduled to be published on December 4. Since the publication of the draft roll, 1.76 lakh applications for inclusion and 4,401 objections seeking deletion of names have been received.

New options have been introduced on the Election Commission’s ECINET portal allowing Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) in Delhi to mark an elector as eligible without requiring documents or a hearing to dispose of a notice issued against the elector’s name, officials told The Hindu on Friday.

The change comes amid allegations of “centralisation” of the functioning of ECINET, which is being used by poll officials for the special intensive revision of electoral rolls in several States.

Sources said a new dialogue box, which now lets EROs clear voters for the final roll without scheduling a hearing or seeking documents, was not available before September 30. While clearing an elector, the ERO is required to upload a declaration that they are satisfied with the voter’s eligibility and have completed the verification.

EROs exercise the final authority over the preparation of the roll and decide on all claims and objections. Officials across constituencies said the options should have been made available from the beginning of the notice phase on August 31.

“The option to bypass hearings on a case-by-case basis should have been available to us from the start. We should have been allowed to take calls in cases where none of the prescribed documents is available,” said an ERO.

Another ERO said, “I first saw the options on Wednesday. So now if I am satisfied with cases where electors don’t have prescribed documents, I can submit a declaration that I have completed verification and proceed. I have disposed of hundreds of cases a day since then.” He could not clear more than 50 cases a day earlier.

‘Nov. 30 deadline’

According to latest data, proceedings have been concluded in fewer than 5 lakh of the 33.1 lakh cases in which notices were generated. In one West Delhi constituency, only two cases have been cleared so far.

The last date for the disposal of notices is November 30.

The limited options had been a concern for EROs dealing with cases where electors were struggling to produce the required documents within the stipulated hearing period.

More than 350 electors were marked ‘ineligible’ for not turning up for hearings, prompting Delhi Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) Ashok Kumar to caution EROs against choosing the option without proper verification.

When reached for response on the new options and why they were introduced at this stage, the Delhi CEO’s Office and the EC did not respond.

What changed

Earlier, uploading a hearing order was mandatory only in cases involving deletion or marking an elector ‘ineligible’.

For an elector to be marked for the final roll after a notice and hearing, the process involved the BLO and ERO and, in ‘no-mapping’ cases, the District Election Officer (DEO).

After the BLO uploaded documents along with an undertaking and photo attendance, the ERO checked the case and sent it to the DEO for verification. The ERO would then place the elector on the final roll based on the DEO’s feedback.

“Even electors who have not been flagged for any notice do not get marked for the final roll automatically. The ERO has to do it case by case,” said a source.

The new options alter that process. EROs can now place an elector in the final roll without uploading documents and, in certain cases, without scheduling a hearing.