For voters in Delhi, the practical question is simple. Your name isn’t on the draft roll, and you want it back. Until this week, the answer wasn’t clear.
According to the letter, voters who were issued enumeration forms but whose names couldn’t be included in the draft roll because they were marked ASDD will get one more opportunity to get their names into the final roll. Partially filled enumeration forms for all such electors will be generated again through the ERO dashboard on ECINET.
The route depends on where you live now. If you haven’t moved, you submit the form with a statement explaining why you couldn’t file it earlier, either yourself or through a family member. If you’ve moved within the state, you use the form with a statement giving your old and new address, plus proof of the new residence, instead of Form 8. Anyone who already filed Form 6 for fresh enrolment is exempt.
The numbers are large. Deccan Herald counts 4,51,76,997 voters left off draft rolls across the seven places: 2.06 crore in Maharashtra, 73.39 lakh in Telangana, 47.56 lakh in Delhi, 44.89 lakh in Andhra Pradesh, 43.61 lakh in Jharkhand, 33.83 lakh in Haryana and 1.57 lakh in Nagaland.
This didn’t come out of nowhere. On October 28, the Supreme Court asked the Commission why deleted voters were being told to apply through Form 6 for re-inclusion, and why Form 8 couldn’t be used. The question came in a petition by Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri over deletions in Delhi.
Deccan Herald reports the Commission told the court it was now allowing omitted voters to submit pre-filled enumeration forms in place of fresh applications. Earlier this week, headlines in The Hindu and The Economic Times also said the court told excluded voters not to fear prosecution for using Form 6, even as the Commission continued to insist on it. The New Indian Express reports the court will hear the matter on November 19.
Another thread is internal. The Indian Express reported that the Commission dropped a paragraph from the online form that one Commissioner had called illegal, and India Today refers to an internal rift. I’ve only seen those as headlines. I haven’t read the stories, so I’m not putting weight on them.
The opposition read the order as an admission. Ramesh wrote that the instructions are a belated admission that wrongful deletion and exclusion took place under the ASDD category, and said the Commission keeps issuing corrections after outrage over SIR. He repeated that Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar must go and SIR must be suspended. He has also claimed that SIR deprived over 13 crore people of the vote. That figure is his, and it is not one the Commission accepts.
Tharoor, per Mathrubhumi, called it proof that the opposition had been right about “outrageous mistakes.” The Hindu’s headline captured the same line. Journalist Rajdeep Sardesai called it another U-turn and asked whether anyone will face consequences for a flawed process.
The Commission frames it differently. The Statesman describes the move as an additional safeguard before the rolls are finalised. The Delhi chief electoral officer’s office posted that no eligible voter should be excluded and no ineligible person included. The Commission’s position throughout has been that SIR is a routine, lawful exercise and that these steps are part of the process. I haven’t seen it respond directly to the “admission” charge.
A few things aren’t settled. The first is the deadline. The Delhi chief electoral officer’s page says the schedule has been revised, and an earlier report mentioned November 25 for Form 6, but I couldn’t confirm the current date. The second is how many of the 4.5 crore will actually come back, since many ASDD voters may really have moved or died. The third is what the Supreme Court makes of the Form 6 route on November 19.
