The Supreme Court has stayed the order of the High Court, which doubts the process adopted for change in the voter list in Uttarakhand. In this order given on July 18, the High Court had asked the State Election Commissioner and the Chief Secretary to give clarification in person. In this order, the Division Bench had also questioned the formation of an officer who does not know English to the Voter Registration Officer (ERO).
The High Court took this action while hearing the petition of the residents of Budhlakot village in Nainital. It was said in the petition that a large number of such people are being named in the voter list of Gram Panchayat elections, who are outsider. Investigation was done on complaining to SDM. It was found that many such people have been recorded in the voter list, which belong to other districts or states, but still they were not removed from the list.
ERO could not answer in English: HC
The High Court had summoned the ADM of the area, which is responsible for ERO. During the hearing, the officials could not answer the court questions in English. He said that he cannot speak English well. The officer also informed that he has given a place in the voter list to the people registered in the family register of the Gram Panchayat.
The bench of the High Court Chief Justice ji Narendra and Justice Alok Mahara was not satisfied with this. The judges said that the effective Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj (Registration of Electors) Rules in Uttarakhand do not recognize the 1994 family register to register someone’s name in the voter list. Then this register to be created by the Panchayat Secretary was considered a proof of being a local resident?
ERO could not answer HC questions
Officials could not give satisfactory answers to the High Court questions. After this, the judges questioned the process adopted by Uttarakhand Election Commission for voter list improvement. The court said that in this way a large number of people in the entire state will be getting a place in the voter list which are not entitled to it. The High Court had asked the top officials to appear personally and give clarification. At the same time, it was also asked to consider whether it is right to keep an officer who does not know English in the post of ERO?