ET gathers that crucial differences in the Commission were on two aspects: the Attorney General‘s opinion brought before the top brass and the 1980-81 Hegde case.
Both Election Commissioners — Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi — are learnt to have interpreted that the AG opinion and Hegde case inputs favoured resuming the decades-old convention of annual SSR, which was paused after 2024, skipped in 2025 and is yet to be announced in 2026, already late given the usual announcement timeline of May-July.
The two Election Commissioners are learnt to have contended that the rulebook, precedent and legal opinion showed that the four EC stipulated qualifying dates are tied to the SSR process and cannot be activated without it, even if new voters may have filled form 6 for inclusion in electoral rolls as part of the ‘continued updation’.
Also Read: CJP begins protest 2.0 in Mumbai, calls it ‘trailer’
As a result, their names cannot be assumed to be on the formal electoral roll until the annual roll is published in January following the due SSR process; this has not been done in January 2025 and with the continued SSR pause, they may miss the January 2026 cycle as well, it was red flagged.
Legal opinion apart, the Ramakrishna Hegde v. Election Commission of India case in the Delhi High Court was a key consideration.The case arose when Hegde, then general secretary of the Janata Party, challenged the validity of electoral rolls used for 1981 parliamentary by-elections in Kheri, Gulbarga and Keonjhar. Hegde contended that the poll panel had violated norms prescribed in the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, which led to the disenfranchisement of voters, especially new young voters, ahead of elections.
Also Read: Opposition reaches Jantar Mantar, demands CEC resignation
While the court did rule that an incomplete revision should not be used as a tool to block a notified election, it also held that it was mindful of the duty cast upon the Election Commission by the Constitution to ensure that all persons who have attained 21 years (the voting age that time) are registered as voters.
“This mandate should be in spirit and reality adhered to. All such persons have their right to play their role in electing representatives for Parliament and in their little bit shaping the future of the country. This right should not be defeated by any administrative inefficiency. No laxity or negligence in such a matter can be ignored or looked at with approval.
The Election Commission must, therefore, gear up its machinery to keep its electoral rolls up to date and should be ready to meet the challenge of elections or by-elections at any time,” the Delhi High Court bench said in its order.
The order is also significant as the court said the law requires the ECI to ensure that electoral roll revision “should be made up to date as often as necessary”. It added that while Section 21(2) (a) of the Representation of People’s Act, “permits the EC to dispense with revision”, these reasons are to be ‘recorded in writing’.
Meanwhile, as of today, the EC is yet to give any clarity on the issue though indications are that it will announce an SSR but only for states/UTs headed to polls in early 2027 — Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Punjab, Goa and Manipur.
Even if the ongoing SIR is considered and the 19 states/UTs of SIR Phase 3 are not considered, there are 16 impacted states and UTs.
Take the case of Himachal Pradesh and the Union Territories of Ladakh & J&K which are running on their 2024 roll published. No SSR has been conducted there in 2025 or announced for 2026 even as they await the SIR, likely to be conducted only next year now.
Bihar is still functioning with its 2025 electoral roll which was published after the first SIR in the country at September-end.
Another dozen states/UTs of SIR Phase 2 are also off the SSR map which include states headed to polls in early 2027.
Meanwhile, after SIR exclusions touching 13 crores, the ECI on Saturday directed Booth Level Officers to compare current electoral rolls with pre-SIR rolls to check for excluded names and reach out to them through home visits to facilitate inclusion within a month.
