The Crossbill Team
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (June 23) declined to grant an urgent hearing to a petition challenging the West Bengal government's decision to tie welfare benefits to citizens' status in the electoral rolls following the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise conducted ahead of the assembly elections. Instead, the apex court directed the petitioners to move the Calcutta High Court.
A bench comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Joymalya Bagchi questioned the maintainability of the plea under Article 32 of the Constitution, under which the petitioners had directly approached the Supreme Court.
“Why have you filed this under Article 32?” asked the bench, according to a report by Hindustan Times.
The petition was filed by the Paschim Banga Khet Majoor Samity, an agricultural workers' union, challenging a June 4 order issued by the Food and Supplies Department and a May 19 notification of the Department of Women and Child Development and Social Welfare.
The challenged orders link eligibility under the Public Distribution System (PDS) and the Annapurna Yojana to an individual's status in the electoral rolls.
Under the new Annapurna Yojana, which replaced the previous TMC government's Lakshmir Bhandar scheme, women are entitled to receive Rs 3,000 through direct benefit transfer, double the earlier amount. However, the scheme excludes those whose names were deleted from the voter rolls during the SIR exercise, while individuals who have applied under the Citizenship Amendment Act and whose cases are pending adjudication remain eligible.
The petition argued that both government orders rely on classifications generated during the SIR process, such as “dead”, “shifted”, “deleted” and “absentee”, to determine welfare eligibility. According to the Samity, the move could potentially render as many as 60 lakh ration cards inactive if implemented strictly.
Counsel for the petitioners argued that the issue had national significance because several states were beginning to follow the West Bengal government's example, particularly as the SIR exercise is now being conducted across the country.
However, the Supreme Court observed that decisions taken by other states would constitute separate matters.
The controversy has also spilled over into neighbouring Bihar, where chief minister Samrat Choudhary has announced that those excluded from the electoral rolls during the SIR exercise would lose access to government benefits, “including ration”, and that their bank passbooks would also be cancelled in “due course of time”, although no official notification has yet been issued.
The petition further contended that the state government's actions amount to an impermissible use of data collected for one statutory purpose – revising electoral rolls – for an entirely different objective, namely determining eligibility for welfare schemes.
The matter is now expected to be taken up before the Calcutta High Court.
A bench comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Joymalya Bagchi questioned the maintainability of the plea under Article 32 of the Constitution, under which the petitioners had directly approached the Supreme Court.
“Why have you filed this under Article 32?” asked the bench, according to a report by Hindustan Times.
The petition was filed by the Paschim Banga Khet Majoor Samity, an agricultural workers' union, challenging a June 4 order issued by the Food and Supplies Department and a May 19 notification of the Department of Women and Child Development and Social Welfare.
The challenged orders link eligibility under the Public Distribution System (PDS) and the Annapurna Yojana to an individual's status in the electoral rolls.
Under the new Annapurna Yojana, which replaced the previous TMC government's Lakshmir Bhandar scheme, women are entitled to receive Rs 3,000 through direct benefit transfer, double the earlier amount. However, the scheme excludes those whose names were deleted from the voter rolls during the SIR exercise, while individuals who have applied under the Citizenship Amendment Act and whose cases are pending adjudication remain eligible.
The petition argued that both government orders rely on classifications generated during the SIR process, such as “dead”, “shifted”, “deleted” and “absentee”, to determine welfare eligibility. According to the Samity, the move could potentially render as many as 60 lakh ration cards inactive if implemented strictly.
Counsel for the petitioners argued that the issue had national significance because several states were beginning to follow the West Bengal government's example, particularly as the SIR exercise is now being conducted across the country.
However, the Supreme Court observed that decisions taken by other states would constitute separate matters.
The controversy has also spilled over into neighbouring Bihar, where chief minister Samrat Choudhary has announced that those excluded from the electoral rolls during the SIR exercise would lose access to government benefits, “including ration”, and that their bank passbooks would also be cancelled in “due course of time”, although no official notification has yet been issued.
The petition further contended that the state government's actions amount to an impermissible use of data collected for one statutory purpose – revising electoral rolls – for an entirely different objective, namely determining eligibility for welfare schemes.
The matter is now expected to be taken up before the Calcutta High Court.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment