The Supreme Courtroom at this time requested the District Election Officer, Lucknow, to look at the grievances raised by the previous residents of Akbar Nagar, who had been relocated after demolition of their properties, that they weren’t given enumeration types within the Particular Intensive Revision(SIR) course of in Uttar Pradesh and that they had been requested by the Sales space Stage Officers to register as new voters by submitting Type 6.
The bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi refused to entertain the writ petition filed by 91 former residents of Akbar Nagar and relegated them to the DEO. If their grievance isn’t redressed by the DEO, they’ll method the Excessive Courtroom.
It was the case of the petitioners that they resided in Akbar Nagar previous to 1980 until 2024-2025, and after the demolition of their homes, had been rehabilitated within the Vasant Kunj space, outdoors Lucknow Metropolis. As a result of relocation, the Petitioners’ electoral constituency has modified. Solely due to the change of constituency, pursuant to displacement from Akbar Nagar, the ECI fully ignored the Petitioners’ standing as present electors/voters, they contended.
Senior Advocate MR Shamshad, for the petitioners, pressured that the petitioners’ names seem in earlier electoral rolls, together with the 2002 rolls. Bench was additionally knowledgeable {that a} abstract revision was carried out in Akbar Nagar in 2025, and a few petitioners’ names are additionally current in these rolls.
When the CJI requested why the petitioners didnot method the Excessive Courtroom, the counsel answered, ” That is one occasion which has come to yourlordships, now I’ve a listing of 15 such cases all through the nation.”
The CJI replied, “They (petitioners) aren’t performing some form of all India social service, they need to concern themselves with their proper solely.” Shamshad submitted that the petitioners are poor folks, who had been relocated after the demolition of their properties. He submitted that the petitioners approached the Supreme Courtroom because the SC is seized of different petitions in regards to the UP SIR.
The plea states that “the Petitioners’, and plenty of others, haven’t been issued Enumeration Kinds (EFs). As an alternative, the ECI requested them to fill Type – 6 as ‘New Voters’; which has its personal penalties. Petitioners have been searching for to fill Enumeration Type to be adopted by filling out Type 8 to alter their deal with. The Respondents/EROs haven’t permitted this course of within the case of those and different equally positioned voters
The CJI refused to contemplate the plea saying “it might open a Pandora’s field.”
The bench proceeded to direct the district collector of Lucknow to look at the factual facets and take an applicable motion on the difficulty. The petitioners had been allowed to maneuver the Excessive Courtroom if the difficulty nonetheless continued.
“In view of the information and conditions concerned, we’re not inclined to entertain this Writ Petition beneath Article 32.
“We direct the District Collector, Lucknow(District Election Officer), to determine the information of the illustration mentioned to have been submitted by the petitioners and take a remedial motion as per the legislation. If the petitioners’ grievance isn’t addressed successfully, they might method the Excessive Courtroom. It’s clarified that we’ve not expressed something on deserves.”
Why Petitioners’ Problem Submitting Type 6 For ‘New Voters’?
As per the plea, the Petitioners submit that filling of Type 6 shall create a number of points, together with the truth that –
(i) their declaration shall be opposite to the document as they exist already in Electoral Rolls.
(ii) Secondly, in the event that they fill Type – 6, it shall be towards Rule 13(3) of the Guidelines of 1960.
(iii) Thirdly, the Petitioners’ really feel that that is being performed by a design to point out/mirror electors belonging to a specific group as ‘new electors’ to be later categorized as ‘D-Voter’ or ‘Ineligible Voters’ and eventually model them ‘non-Residents’ or infiltrators.
(iv) The Petitioners have come to know that in lots of areas, the place the voters aren’t nicely educated or know the implications of filling Type 6, have ignorantly crammed Type 6 beneath the garb of Enumeration Kinds as advised by BLOs.
The next reliefs had been sought :
I. Direct the ECI to permit the Petitioners and different equally positioned present voters to be supplied with Enumeration Kinds (EFs) for his or her submission with BLOs to finish the train of SIR.
II.Direct the ECI to increase the dates of the method of SIR in relation to all the present voters whose EFs haven’t but been issued.
III. Direct the ECI to file a Standing Report in relation to displaced electors/voters of Akbar Nagar space whose names seem within the Abstract Particular Revision 2025 held in January 2025.
Case Particulars : SANA PARVEEN AND ORS. Versus ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ORS| W.P.(C) No. 191/2026
