Back
Voter Victory: Tribunal Restores Candidacy Hours Before Polls Amid Name Tangle
In a time-sensitive decision just ahead of the elections, the , led by Justice T.S. Sivagnanam , has allowed the appeal of aspiring candidate Motab Shaikh . Excluded from the voter rolls over a name discrepancy, Shaikh's plea was upheld, with the tribunal directing his immediate inclusion by . This ruling underscores the pivotal role of documents like Aadhaar in resolving identity disputes under electoral law.
From 2002 Voter List to 2026 Polling Booth Drama
The saga began with inconsistencies in Shaikh's name across voter lists. In the 2002 rolls—drawn after a Special Intensive Revision (SIR)—he appeared as Motab Herul . An affidavit filed on , sought correction, leading to a Voter ID issued in as Motab Sk son of Ejabul Sekh . Fast-forward to the 2025-26 revision: the , list (base date ) listed him as Motab Shaikh , but a notice cited a supposed mismatch in name or father's name.
Shaikh, nominated by a national party for Farakka constituency, approached the Adjudicating Judicial Officer, only to be excluded. The , in on , redirected him to this tribunal, formed per its earlier order in . Hearing fixed for , the tribunal noted the Election Commission's failure to provide the exclusion reasons, prompting a full record review.
Appellant's Arsenal of Proofs vs. Commission's Technical Snag
Shaikh's advocates , and , argued identity match despite variations: Aadhaar lists Motabh Shaikh ; passport ( ) Motab Shaikh ; driving license ( ) Motab Shaikh son of Ejabul Shaikh ; birth certificates of four children (from ) Motab Shaikh . Father's name consistent everywhere. All six siblings, spouses, and children included—no family-wide issues. Urgency amplified by candidacy.
Election Commission officials, Mr. Arun Prasad (Additional CEO) and Ms. Divya Murugesan (Jt. CEO) , couldn't furnish the Adjudicating Officer's reasons due to technical issues. The notice vaguely mentioned name/father discrepancy, but only name mattered—father's was undisputed. No substantive counter-arguments emerged.
Precedents Seal the Deal on Identity
Drawing from , decided , the tribunal invoked . The SC clarified Aadhaar—statutorily valid under the —is acceptable for identity in voter lists, though not citizenship proof. Initially Bihar-specific, applied here squarely.
Passport, license, affidavit, and family records reinforced continuity. Unseen records likely overlooked in initial adjudication, as reasons were absent.
Key Observations
"Aadhar Card is one of the documents enumerated for the purpose of establishing the identity of a person."
"The only issue to be decided in this appeal is whether Motab Shaikh and Shaikh Motaferul are one and the same person."
"In the voters list drawn pursuant to the SIR conducted in 2002 the name of the appellant was mentioned as Motab Herul... Taking note of such affidavit... theissued Voter ID card... mentioning the name of the appellant as Motab Sk son of Ejabul Sekh."
"The above records appears to have not been taken note of during the adjudication process."
No More Exclusion: Immediate Inclusion Ordered
Appeal allowed
. The tribunal directed:
"include the name of the appellant MOTAB SHAIKH in the list of valid voters by publishing his name in the supplementary list by 8.00 p.m. today (
)"
.
This sets a precedent for swift, document-based resolutions in voter disputes, especially pre-election. Candidates facing name tweaks can lean on Aadhaar and consistent ancillary proofs, easing administrative hurdles while safeguarding democratic participation. With polls looming, Shaikh races to the booth—name intact.
