The Election Commission has withdrawn the additional SIR-related declaration from the online voter enrolment Form 6 in states where the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls has been completed, days after the full Commission decided that the requirement would apply only during the exercise.
The declaration, which requires new applicants to furnish details linking themselves or their parents or grandparents to electoral rolls prepared during an earlier intensive revision, remains available on the ECINET portal in states and Union Territories where the SIR is underway.
In states where SIR has concluded, the additional declaration has now been removed from the ECINET app and portal as well as the respective Chief Electoral Officer portals, leaving applicants seeking enrolment to fill only the statutory Form 6 prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.
The move follows a September 26 meeting of the full Commission comprising Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi.
After the meeting, the poll panel had said that the declaration attached to Form 6 was meant for SIR and that "for non-SIR period, the Forms applicable as per Rules (the Registration of Electors Rules 1960) will be used".
The issue had become a point of controversy after it emerged that Sandhu and Joshi had raised objections over changes relating to Form 6.Form 6 is the statutory form used by eligible citizens to apply for inclusion in the electoral roll. Joshi had objected to changes to the form on the grounds that a form prescribed under the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, could not be modified without amending the rules. Sandhu had concurred with him.
After the SIR-related declaration was incorporated into the online Form 6 process on ECINET, Sandhu again objected, describing the change as "unauthorised/illegal" and seeking its removal.
In its public statements, however, the EC has maintained that Form 6 itself was not amended and that the declaration was an additional SIR-specific requirement. It has also stated that the declaration had been upheld by the Supreme Court in its judgment on the Bihar SIR.
The September 26 decisions came after the Indian Express claimed that Sandhu and Joshi had objected on record at least 14 times over the past 10 months to decisions and orders on SIR that they said were issued without their knowledge or recommendation.The Commission, its September 26 statement, maintained that orders relating to SIR had the unanimous approval of all three election commissioners.