DMK Challenges ECI’s Voter Revision in Supreme Court, Alleges ‘De Facto NRC’

New Delhi – Tamil Nadu's ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) has escalated its opposition to the Election Commission of India's (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, filing a writ petition before the Supreme Court. The petition, lodged on November 3, 2025, by DMK Organising Secretary R.S. Bharathi, mounts a multi-pronged legal challenge against the ECI's orders, arguing the exercise constitutes "constitutional overreach," lacks statutory authority, and functions as a "thinly-disguised, de facto National Register of Citizens (NRC)."

The petition, filed under Article 32, seeks to quash the ECI’s directives dated June 24, 2025, and October 27, 2025, which mandate the SIR in Tamil Nadu and 11 other states and Union Territories. The DMK contends that if the exercise proceeds, it could "arbitrarily and without due process, disenfranchise lakhs of voters," thereby undermining the principles of free and fair elections, which form part of the Constitution's basic structure.

This legal battle brings to the forefront critical questions about the scope of the ECI's powers under Article 324, the sanctity of the statutory framework governing electoral rolls, and the potential for administrative processes to infringe upon the fundamental right to vote.

Core Legal Arguments: Constitutional Overreach and Lack of Statutory Basis

At the heart of the DMK's challenge is the assertion that the ECI has impermissibly ventured beyond its constitutional mandate. The petition, settled by Senior Advocate N.R. Elango, argues that the ECI's plenary powers under Article 324 are intended to fill legislative gaps, not to supplant existing laws.

“The Respondent is seeking to supplant the existing statutory framework which already governs the preparation and revision of electoral rolls. The manner in which the SIR has been directed to be conducted is found neither in ROPA nor the 1960 Rules… and is therefore ultra vires of the same,” the petition states.

The DMK highlights that the Representation of the People Act (ROPA), 1950, and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, provide a comprehensive and time-tested mechanism for the revision of electoral rolls. It points out that a Special Summary Revision (SSR) was already concluded in Tamil Nadu on January 6, 2025, which addressed issues of migration, deaths, and deletion of ineligible voters. The party questions the "demonstrable administrative exigency" for a fresh, resource-intensive de novo verification so soon after the completion of the statutory SSR.

Furthermore, the petition alleges a fatal procedural flaw, arguing that the SIR lacks the force of law. It cites Section 28(3) of ROPA, which mandates that all rules framed under the Act must be notified in the Official Gazette and laid before Parliament. "No such notification has been issued for the SIR and the same has not been laid before the Parliament," the petition argues, concluding that the entire exercise is without a valid statutory basis.

The ‘De Facto NRC’ Allegation: A Shift from Elector to Citizen Verification

The most significant and politically charged claim in the petition is that the SIR effectively morphs the ECI into an authority for citizenship verification, a role the DMK asserts is exclusively vested with the Union Government under the Citizenship Act, 1955.

“By imposing citizenship-like burdens of proof on electors, the SIR appears to be acting beyond its statutory purpose, effectively functioning as a de facto National Register of Citizens (NRC),” the DMK submitted.

The party contends that the SIR reverses the established legal presumption that an individual enrolled in the voter list is a legitimate elector. Instead, it places an "onerous burden" on every registered voter to re-establish their eligibility through a restrictive list of documents. This process is particularly stringent for those not listed on the 2003 electoral roll. The petition highlights the exclusion of commonly held government-issued documents like Ration Cards, PAN Cards, and even the Voter ID card (EPIC) itself as proof, a move it deems arbitrary.

The plea also raises alarms about the powers granted to Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) to refer cases of ‘suspected foreign nationals’ to competent authorities, arguing this occurs without the due process guarantees required for such a determination.

Procedural Arbitrariness and the Threat of Mass Disenfranchisement

The DMK’s legal team meticulously details what it describes as a series of arbitrary and unworkable procedural requirements that are "bound to cause confusion, uncertainty, and disenfranchisement." Key concerns include:

• Unrecognized Forms: The use of "enumeration forms" for house-to-house surveys by Booth Level Officers (BLOs) is not sanctioned under ROPA or the 1960 Rules.
• Automatic Deletion: The process allegedly allows for the automatic omission of voters from draft rolls if they fail to produce the required documents, effectively treating them as non-citizens until they can prove otherwise by filing a fresh Form 6 claim.
• Subjective Discretion: BLOs are empowered to mark electors as 'absent', 'shifted', or 'duplicate' based on informal inquiries, creating a high risk of erroneous deletions.
• Unrealistic Timelines: The schedule, concluding by February 7, 2026, is criticized as unworkable for Tamil Nadu, as it coincides with the monsoon season, Christmas, and the Pongal festival.
• Illusory Appeal Mechanism: While an appeal process exists, its timeline overlaps with other stages of the SIR, rendering it practically ineffective for aggrieved individuals.

Citing the precedent of a similar SIR in Bihar, where a staggering "65.2 lakh existing electors were deleted," the petition warns of a potential mass exclusion of genuine voters in Tamil Nadu, disproportionately impacting marginalized communities. "They disproportionately burden the youth, migrants, women, economically weaker sections and marginalised communities, who are least likely to be able to furnish such records within the unreasonably truncated timeline prescribed," it notes.

Violation of Federalism and Basic Structure

The petition frames the ECI's unilateral imposition of the SIR as an affront to the federal structure of the Constitution. By bypassing consultation and statutory safeguards, the DMK argues, "the State concerned has effectively been reduced to a mere implementing agency for centrally determined, unilateral processes." This, it contends, violates a recognized component of the Constitution's basic structure.

The plea asserts that the SIR infringes upon a cluster of fundamental rights, including Article 14 (Equality), Article 19 (Freedoms), Article 21 (Life and Dignity), and fundamentally undermines the principle of universal adult suffrage enshrined in Article 326.

As the matter, identified by Diary Number 63055/2025, awaits listing before the Supreme Court, the legal community will be watching closely. The Court's examination of the ECI's powers vis-à-vis statutory law and the fundamental right to vote will have far-reaching implications for electoral governance and the delicate balance between administrative verification and citizen rights in India.