Institute of Legal and Management Studies

Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), the ruling party in Tamil Nadu, has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Election Commission of India's (ECI) decision to conduct a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Tamil Nadu, terming it a case of “constitutional overreach” and a move that could lead to large-scale disenfranchisement of voters.

The petition, filed under Article 32, challenges the ECI's orders dated June 24, 2025 and October 27, 2025, which directed the conduct of SIR.

According to the petition, a Special Summary Revision (SSR) had already been conducted in Tamil Nadu between October 2024 and January 6, 2025, during which the electoral roll was updated to reflect changes such as migration, deaths and deletion of ineligible voters. The revised roll was published on January 6, 2025, and has been continuously updated since then.

Despite this, the DMK said, the ECI on October 27, 2025, purportedly invoking its powers under Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act (ROPA), 1950, directed a fresh Special Intensive Revision of the electoral rolls in Tamil Nadu and various other States, introducing new guidelines that impose citizenship verification requirements,especially for those whose names were not on the 2003 electoral roll.

'Constitutional Overreach' And Lack Of Statutory Basis

The petition argues that the ECI's decision amounts to constitutional overreach, as Article 324 operates only in areas unoccupied by legislation, and cannot supplant the existing statutory framework under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960.

It contends that the SIR is ultra vires the parent Act and Rules since the procedure directed by the ECI finds no mention in either. Further, Section 28(3) of RP Act mandates that all rules be notified in the Official Gazette and laid before Parliament. No such notification has been issued for the SIR, rendering the exercise without statutory force and lacking legal basis.

The DMK asserts that the ECI has provided no exceptional or compelling reason necessitating a de novo verification of such an extensive nature. The orders, the party submits, are arbitrary, unreasonable, and a colourable exercise of power.

SIR 'A De Facto NRC', Burdening Citizens To Prove Citizenship

The DMK warns that through the SIR, the Election Commission has “claimed the power to assess the citizenship of individuals,” a power that rests solely with the Union Government under the Citizenship Act, 1955.

By imposing documentation requirements akin to a citizenship test, the SIR allegedly transforms the ECI into a “de facto National Register of Citizens (NRC).”

The petition states that the SIR reverses the presumption of legitimacy attached to an enrolled elector and places an onerous burden on registered voters to re-establish their citizenship, without adequate notice. It also empowers Electoral Registration Officers (EROs) to refer “suspected foreign nationals” to authorities under the Citizenship Act, bypassing due process.

Procedural Arbitrary And Risk Of Mass Disenfranchisement

The DMK petition conteded that the SIR had the following procedural irregularities and arbitrary features :

The DMK contends that such a process “is bound to cause confusion, uncertainty, and disenfranchisement of a significant number of voters,” similar to what has already been witnessed in Bihar where a similar SIR was carried out.

Violation Of Fundamental Rights And Federal Structure

The petition argues that the SIR violates Articles 10, 14, 19, 21, and 326 of the Constitution by infringing the right to vote, equality, and dignity. It also violates the basic structure of the Constitution by undermining universal adult suffrage and the federal principle.

The new document requirements, it states, fail to accommodate the realities of marginalised communities, including the poor, migrants, youth, women, and economically weaker sections, who are least likely to have the prescribed documents.

By unilaterally imposing such a resource-intensive and socially disruptive process on a State without consultation or demonstrable necessity, the ECI has, the DMK says, reduced the State to “a mere implementing agency for a centrally determined exercise.”

The DMK's petition also notes that similar challenges against the SIR orders in Bihar are already pending before the Supreme Court.

The DMK urged the Supreme Court to quash the impugned orders dated June 24, 2025 and October 27, 2025, and declare the Special Intensive Revision as unconstitutional, arbitrary, and without statutory authority.

The petition has been drawn by Advocate Saushriya Havelia, settled by Senior Advocate NR Elango and filed by Vivek Singh AoR.

Case : RS Bharati v Election Commission of India | Diary Number 63055/2025 .