SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Gau) 710

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
Jaban Ali, S/o- moin uddin, And Ors. - Petitioners
Versus 
The Election Commission Of India Represented By The Chief Election Commissioner, And Ors.  - Respondents
WP(C)/1813 of 2026
Decided On : 31-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. S B Laskar, Ms D Dutta, Mr. H A Laskar,A. H. Ahmed
For the Respondent: Sc, Eci, Ga, Assam

When a special statute provides for a comprehensive remedial mechanism, including applications for inclusion and subsequent appellate reviews for the correction of electoral rolls, the court will typically decline to exercise writ jurisdiction, requiring the parties to exhaust said statutory, efficacious, and adequate remedies first.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Representation of the People Act, 1950 - Sections 21, 22, 23 and 24 - Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 - Rule 26 - Deletion of entries in electoral rolls - Requirement of prior opportunity of being heard - Principles of natural justice apply where statute mandates inquiry - Availability of statutory alternative remedies - Writ jurisdiction - Exercise of discretionary power regarding existence of efficacious alternative remedy. (Paras 9, 10, 11, 12, 17)

(B) Writ jurisdiction - Availability of alternative statutory remedy - When a statute provides for specific mechanisms such as applications for inclusion of names and appellate procedures, the court will generally decline to interfere under its extraordinary jurisdiction, especially where factual determinations are required regarding residence or eligibility. (Paras 9, 17, 20)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners sought the intervention of the court after finding their names missing from the final published electoral rolls, despite previous enrollments. The authorities submitted that the names were deleted due to the alleged shifting of residence out of specified territorial limits. While some petitioners were confirmed as enrolled, others remained excluded. The petitioners contended that no prior notice or opportunity of being heard was provided before the deletion of their names.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the relevant legislation dictates that any deletion of names must follow a process requiring an inquiry and a reasonable opportunity of being heard. However, it noted that where such a grievance involves disputed questions of fact regarding residency, the petitioners must exhaust the statutory mechanisms, specifically the application process for inclusion and subsequent appeals, before approaching the court.

Issues: Whether the writ petition is maintainable when the petitioners have not exhausted the statutory remedies provided under the legislation for the inclusion of names, and whether the court should adjudicate on disputed factual claims regarding the deletion of names from electoral rolls.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that where a statute provides a comprehensive mechanism for the rectification of electoral entries and a tiered appellate structure, aggrieved individuals must first exhaust these remedies. The electoral registration authorities are legally mandated to conduct inquiries and provide reasons for any decision, which constitutes an efficacious and adequate remedy. Consequently, the court directed the petitioners to utilize these statutory channels as the appropriate forum for resolving factual contentions regarding their enrollment.

Result: Petition disposed of with directions to file applications before the jurisdictional authority.

Table of Content
1. procedural background and standing of petitioners in a representative writ petition. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. disputed factual claims regarding the arbitrary deletion of names without due process. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. maintainability of writ petitions where statutory administrative remedies remain unexhausted. (Para 8 , 9)
4. obligation to exhaust statutory remedies under sections 22, 23, and 24 of the representation of the people act, 1950 before judicial intervention. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
5. direction to undergo administrative verification processes within specified statutory timelines. (Para 18 , 19 , 20)

ORDER :

MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.

Heard Mr. H.A. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioners; Ms. S. Kataki, learned Standing Counsel, Election Commission of India [ECI] for the respondent nos. 1, 2, 4 & 5 and Mr. G. Bokalial, learned Junior Government Advocate for the respondent no. 3.

2. The petitioners, forty-two in nos., have joined together to institute the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India stating that they have a common cause of action to espouse.

3. The petitioners have claimed that they are residents of Village – N/S. Solamona, Post Office – Kotamoni Bazar, Pin – 788728, District – Sribhumi, Assam. The petitioners have stated that for a long period of time they have been casting their votes in both State Legislative Assembly Elections and/or Parliamentary Elections by virtue of enrollment of their names as voters in the concerned Electoral Rolls, published from time to time. The petitioners have claimed that they had cast their votes in the previous elections in both State Legislative Assembly Elections and/or Parliamentary Elections as the voters from 125 No. Patherkandi Legislative Assembly Constituency [LAC], District – Sribhumi, Assam. All the petitioners were issued Electoral Photo Identity Cards [EPICs] by the Election Commission of India [ECI].

4. Mr. Laskar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that during the process of Special Revision of Electoral Rolls, 2026 carried out in the State of Assam, house to house verification of voters was carried out and thereafter, a draft Electoral Roll was published on 27.12.2025 inviting claims and objections from eligible voters. After disposal of the claims and objections on 02.02.2026, the final Electoral Roll for the year 2026 was published on 10.02.2026 for Polling Station no. 178 under 125 No. Patherkandi LAC. He has submitted that the names of the petitioners were enlisted in the final Electoral Roll published on 10.02.2026 in respect of Polling Station no. 178. But the petitioners, to their surprise, have found that their names are not traceable in the official portal maintained by the ECI.

5. Mr. Laskar has submitted that as their names are not included in the Electoral Rolls, the petitioners would be prevented from exercising the right to franchise in the upcoming Legislative Assembly Election in Assam where the date, 09.04.2026 has been notified as the date of polling. He has further contended that the name of a voter whose name was included in the previous Electoral Roll and also found in the Electoral Roll published on 10.02.2026, could not have been deleted from the Electoral Roll and before such deletion, such a person must be given a prior opportunity of being heard. But, none of the petitioners was afforded any prior opportunity of being heard.

6. When the writ petition was moved on 27.03.2026, Ms. Kataki, learned Standing Counsel, ECI was requested to obtain instructions as to whether the names of the petitioners are enrolled in the official electoral database maintained by the ECI. Today, Ms. Kataki has submitted upon receipt of instructions that out of the forty-two nos. of petitioners, the names of petitioner nos. 3, 4, 5, 9, 11, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 28, 29 & 34 [‘the first group’, for short] are included in the Electoral Roll and they are in a position to exerc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top