Scrap SIR, commissioners raised valid issues: Ex-commissioner Lavasa

Two of three election commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, objected to decisions taken in the Election Commission of India's name without their knowledge, the Indian Express reported Wednesday. They flagged changes to Form 6 and centralised control over IT systems, citing a Goa case where 97 voters verified as eligible by ground officers could not be added because the software did not permit it. Former commissioner Ashok Lavasa called the issues serious and legal, and said the SIR should be scrapped. The ECI has denied the allegations.

Written by AI from Hindustan Times — India · not yet reviewed by an editor · Published 23 Sept 2026, 4:23 pm IST

Source

Hindustan Times — India · read the original report ↗

#election commission#sir#ashok lavasa#electoral rolls#form 6

Desk check · some claims need care

What the desk checked (5)

Election commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi objected to decisions taken in the ECI's name without their knowledge — Attributed in source to an Indian Express report of Wednesday; not independently confirmed in the text, and the source says the ECI has denied it.
In Goa, 97 voters verified as eligible by ground officers could not be added because the software did not allow the update — Figure appears in the source, attributed to the commissioners' concerns as reported; no ECI confirmation cited.
Form 6 was changed without following due procedure — Stated by Ashok Lavasa, who adds that Form 6 is in the public domain and 'that claim has been verified'; the alleged procedural lapse itself is unverified.
The ECI refused an RTI seeking minutes of meetings where the SIR decision was taken, saying no such records were maintained — Claim made by Lavasa in the interview; no document or case number given in source.
Lavasa says the SIR should be scrapped and courts can examine procedural legality — Direct opinion of the named interviewee, clearly attributed.

Written by AI from Hindustan Times — India · not yet reviewed by an editor · How we use AI · Report an error

Analysts’ view opinion

AI Political Analyst

This shifts the SIR row from an opposition talking point to a dispute with voices inside the Election Commission itself. The story reports that two of three commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, objected to decisions taken in the ECI's name without their knowledge — and former commissioner Ashok Lavasa's call to scrap the SIR lends that political weight. With the ECI denying the allegations, this becomes a contest over records: credibility will settle with whichever side can produce them.

The most consequential political change is that criticism of the roll revision now rests on institutional voices rather than only party claims.
By invoking the majority-decision rule and asking why the view of two commissioners did not prevail, Lavasa frames this as a procedural question rather than a personal attack — harder to dismiss.
Form 6 changes, curbs on ERO powers and the Goa example of 97 verified voters give the opposition simple, concrete lines to take to the public.
If the ECI stops at a flat denial without releasing meeting records, the question of how the decisions were taken will keep working as a political weapon.
Since courts have so far ruled only on the ECI's constitutional power to conduct the SIR, the procedural and legality questions leave room for fresh litigation.

What to watch — Watch whether the ECI moves beyond denial to publish records of when and how these decisions were taken, and whether the opposition carries the issue into Parliament or the courts.

The commissioners' objections come via a news report that the ECI has denied; the story does not establish that any law was actually broken, nor does it say anything about effects on electoral outcomes.

Deep dive

Research brief · 8 facts · 6 dates · exam-ready

The brief

Context

The Election Commission of India is conducting a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The Indian Express reported that two of the three election commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, objected that decisions were taken in the ECI's name without their knowledge — including unilateral changes to voter registration Form 6, centralised control over IT systems such as ERONET, and decisions on deletion and restoration of names. HT interviewed former election commissioner Ashok Lavasa, who in 2019 publicly dissented from the ECI's exoneration of leaders accused of violating the model code of conduct. Lavasa called the objections serious and legal in nature and said the SIR should be scrapped; the ECI has denied the allegations.

Key facts

Two of three election commissioners — Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi — objected to decisions taken in the ECI's name without their knowledge, as reported by the Indian Express on Wednesday.
The commissioners flagged unilateral changes to voter registration forms, centralised control over IT systems, and decisions on deletion and restoration of names.
In a Goa case under the SIR, 97 voters verified as eligible by ground officers could not be added to the rolls because the software did not allow the update to be recorded.
Form 6 now requires new voters to declare whether they, a parent, or a grandparent appeared on the 'last SIR' roll; Lavasa says it was changed without following due procedure.
Lavasa says the law prescribes one form while another form is in use, and asks with whose authority Form 6 was changed.
Lavasa says the procedure adopted impedes the statutory powers of the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO).
In an RTI case, petitioners sought minutes of the meetings where the SIR decision was taken; the ECI refused, saying no such records were maintained.
The law governing ECI functioning says decisions will be taken unanimously as far as possible, and otherwise by majority — Lavasa asks why the view of the two commissioners did not prevail.

Timeline

2019Ashok Lavasa, then an election commissioner, publicly dissented from the ECI's exoneration of leaders accused of violating the model code of conduct.
Not dated in the sourceForm 6 changed to require declaration on whether the voter, a parent or grandparent appeared on the 'last SIR' roll; SIR launched.
Not dated in the sourceIn Goa, 97 voters verified as eligible by ground officers could not be added because ERONET software did not permit the update.
Not dated in the sourceRTI petitioners sought minutes of meetings on the SIR decision; ECI said no such records were maintained.
Not dated in the sourceCourt heard and pronounced only on whether the ECI has constitutional power to conduct the kind of SIR it has done.
Wednesday (as reported)Indian Express reports the two commissioners' objections; ECI denies the allegations; HT interviews Lavasa, who calls for the SIR to be scrapped.

Who has a stake

Election Commission of India — Institutional credibility; has denied the allegations and, per Lavasa, must place records on when decisions were taken and who was present.
Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi — Say decisions were taken in the ECI's name without their knowledge; their objections raise questions of collegiate decision-making.
Ashok Lavasa, former election commissioner — Says the issues are serious and legal, calls internal functioning 'absolutely improper', and wants the SIR scrapped.
Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) and Block Level Officers (BLOs) — Statutory powers to add or delete names allegedly impeded by centralised software control, as in the Goa case.
Voters, including the 97 in Goa — Risk of eligible persons being kept off the electoral roll despite ground verification.
Judiciary — Has so far ruled only on the ECI's constitutional power to conduct SIR; Lavasa says procedures and legalities remain open for scrutiny.

Why it matters

The electoral roll is the foundation of the right to vote, and the dispute is about whether legally mandated procedures and the statutory powers of field officers were bypassed in revising it. Objections from two of three commissioners, plus the ECI's reported refusal to produce meeting minutes, raise questions about collegiate decision-making and transparency in a constitutional body. If eligible voters verified on the ground cannot be added because software does not permit it, technology begins overriding law.

UPSC angle

Prelims pointers

SIR stands for Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, being conducted by the Election Commission of India.
Form 6 is the application form for enrolment of a new voter; the revised form asks about the applicant's, parent's or grandparent's presence on the 'last SIR' roll.
ERONET is the IT system used for electoral roll management; ERO is the Electoral Registration Officer and BLO the Block Level Officer.
Law governing ECI functioning: decisions taken unanimously as far as possible, otherwise by majority.
Ashok Lavasa, as election commissioner in 2019, publicly dissented from the ECI's exoneration of leaders accused of violating the model code of conduct.
Goa SIR case: 97 voters verified as eligible by ground officers could not be added because the software did not allow the update.

Mains framing

The controversy over the Special Intensive Revision turns less on the ECI's constitutional authority — which the court has already pronounced upon — than on the legality of the procedures used to exercise it. Two of three election commissioners allege that decisions were taken in the ECI's name without their knowledge, covering changes to Form 6, centralisation of IT control and decisions on deletion and restoration of names; former commissioner Ashok Lavasa argues that the law prescribes a specific form and vests statutory authority in the ERO, so a changed form and a software system that prevents an ERO from adding eligible voters — as in the Goa case of 97 verified voters — would be improper. The deeper issue is that technology is meant to be a support tool, not a substitute for statutory authority, and centralised integration of rolls is unobjectionable only if it does not strip field officers of powers conferred by law. The reported RTI refusal on the ground that no minutes of the SIR decision were maintained compounds the transparency problem, since a plain denial cannot answer allegations that can only be refuted by records showing the commissioners were present. The way forward suggested in the source is an official statement placing all facts and dates before the public, an inquiry into whether legal procedures were violated, judicial examination of procedure and legality rather than power alone, and — in Lavasa's view — scrapping the SIR.

Key terms

Special Intensive Revision (SIR): The ECI exercise of intensively revising electoral rolls, under which the Goa case of 97 unaddable verified voters arose.
Form 6: Voter registration form for new electors; the revised version asks whether the applicant, a parent or grandparent was on the 'last SIR' roll.
ERO (Electoral Registration Officer): Officer statutorily empowered to hear petitions and add or delete names from the electoral roll.
BLO (Block Level Officer): Ground-level official involved in verification and maintenance of electoral rolls.
ERONET: ECI's IT system for electoral roll management; commissioners objected to centralised control over it at headquarters.
Model Code of Conduct: Norms for parties and candidates during elections; Lavasa dissented in 2019 from the ECI's exoneration of leaders accused of violating it.

Practice questions

Does the centralisation of electoral roll IT systems risk diluting the statutory powers of Electoral Registration Officers? Discuss with reference to the Special Intensive Revision controversy.
The Election Commission of India is a multi-member body whose decisions are to be unanimous or by majority. Examine how internal dissent should be recorded and resolved to protect institutional credibility.
'Technology is only a tool, not a source of authority.' Critically examine this statement in the context of electoral roll revision in India.

Grounded only in the source report — figures and dates are the source's, not inferred.

Next storyActivist urges UNHRC to act on PoK civilian killings →

← All stories