Top News

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and justice Joymalya Bagchi on 4 December 2025 said states could choose to depute additional employees to strengthen the ranks of booth level officers and reduce their work stress. State employees recruited as BLOs, the bench observed, had an obligation to perform the statutory duties assigned to them.

“It is for the state governments to “obviate the hardships” of the BLOs. Whenever an employee has any individual, specific reasons for seeking exemption from the assigned duties, the competent authority, the State government, may consider such requests on a case-to-case basis and replace such persons,” the court directed.

Curiously, the election commission of India has not claimed that there is any shortage of ‘staff’ in conducting the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in 12 states and UTs. It has dismissed as ‘imaginary’ all reports of the distress of BLOs and deaths by suicide by some of them. It is also not the case of the ECI that any state government has refused to depute staff for the purpose. The fact is that no state can deny the requisition for employees made by the election commission. Under the law, the ECI can requisition the services of as many employees as required by it for conducting the electoral process including revision of rolls.

Why then did the Supreme Court put the onus on state governments and allowed them to decide the BLOs they want to be replaced? As a consequence of the directive, apprehended insiders, state governments would be tempted to depute select employees with political affiliations to conduct the electoral processes.

State government employees, most of them with strong political opinion and leanings, in any case are prone to favour the ruling parties in the states. The latest directive of the Supreme Court would strengthen the states and help them interfere in the process, these sources felt. How can the state governments be allowed to replace the BLOs without any training, questioned others.

Normally the election commission of India would discuss with state governments the requirement and availability of employees for the exercise. It would be for the election commission to screen the employees, decide on their suitability and decide on allocating tasks to them. Was the process followed before SIR? Nobody seems to know for certain.

Why didn’t the Supreme Court’s counsel Rakesh Dwivedi point out to the apex court that it was entirely for the ECI to conduct the SIR and requisition as many state government employees it required? Would it then have allowed the states to possibly point out that they were not consulted on the availability of employees? Surely it was for the ECI to point out that state governments refusing to lend the services of employees to the commission ran the risk of being dismissed?

The election commission, sources claimed, erred in not discussing the with the state governments about the timing and availability of employees. It also miscalculated, they say, while insisting that distribution, collection and uploading of forms be completed within a month, which, by all accounts, is proving to be inadequate. It further erred in lodging FIRs against BLOs and threaten them with suspension and dismissals if they failed to complete their assigned work within the right schedule.

What has compounded the problem is that most of the state governments have not relieved the BLOs of their primary duty. Teachers lent to the ECI for SIR are still required to attend to school and engage classes, presumably because of exams and the pressure of completing the syllabi. With students in several states preparing for their Board examinations, it may have placed additional pressure on them. The ECI also appears to have made the unreasonable assumption that BLOs would work not eight-hours a day but for 14 to 16 hours a day to meet the deadline.

“The Election Commission appears to have dismantled the electoral process built during the last 70 years. The Supreme Court’s direction will unfortunately accelerate the process and compromise the integrity of elections by allowing ruling parties to interfere in elections,” said one of the insiders while talking to the National Herald.