He also flagged a need to sensitise Booth Level Officers (BLOs) to interact more with affected voters, for their benefit.
“We are now suggesting, that the BLO should simply assist the person. They should reach out and tell them that, look, here your certificate, or maybe even in an old 2002 voter list, the name is mentioned,” suggested CJI Kant.
The Court added that the Election Commission of India (ECI) could come out with a list of frequently asked questions that voters may have about the process.
“Maybe 10 to 15 queries or objections or questions. You can prepare a standard response to that and circulate to all of us. Something like an FAQ. Publish in newspapers, you can put it on websites, you can ask your municipality, you can ask your BLOs. And wherever the mobile numbers are there (of officers who could be contacted in case of further doubts), you can send it there. That even this much information will be sufficient. That will help the people enormously,” CJI Kant suggested.
The Court proceeded to issue notice in the matter to formally seek the ECI’s response to the plea concerning the Delhi SIR.
“Issue notice. Let the response also indicate the immediate steps taken so far. List after two weeks,” the Court ordered.
The Court also took note of the ECI’s submission that there is time to correct any lapses noticed in the Delhi SIR process, since the capital is not headed for any elections in the near future.
“In Delhi, there are no elections in the near future now,” remarked CJI Kant.