Delhi SIR: Notices to Advani, Sandhu, Jaishankar... so why should you worry?

The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Delhi has thrown up discrepancies involving several senior serving and retired bureaucrats, politicians and other prominent public figures, including Election Commissioner S S Sandhu, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar and former deputy prime minister L K Advani.

Sandhu has reportedly received a notice over a mismatch in his name, while several senior officials have been classified as “unmapped with last SIR”. Those named in the exercise include Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri, SEBI chairperson Tuhin Kanta Pandey, Principal Scientific Adviser Ajay Sood, Health Secretary Punya Salila, Fisheries Secretary Abhilaksh Likhi, Food Secretary Rajat Kumar Mishra and Land Resources Secretary Narendra Bhushan.

Jaishankar and Advani have also been flagged. Advani's case is particularly notable because the previous electoral roll being used for mapping dates to 2002, when he was serving as deputy prime minister and was living in Delhi.

Several retired officials have also received notices, including former NITI Aayog vice-chairperson Arvind Panagariya, UGC chairperson M Jagadesh Kumar, former CAG Sanjay Murthy, former Defence Secretary Giridhar Aramane and former Environment Secretary Leena Nandan.

The exercise has produced another unusual case: the name of economist Bibek Debroy, who died in November 2024, was also reportedly flagged.

The scale of these cases raises a second question about what the presence of well-known names in the discrepancy list actually signifies.

One possible reading is that the inclusion of prominent voters could demonstrate that the notices are being generated through a broad verification exercise rather than being targeted exclusively at ordinary or politically inconvenient voters. In that sense, the cases could be used to show that even established public figures are being asked to verify their records.

If so, this trend has come up pretty late in the exercise, and one can't help but wonder if it is some sort of response to the nationwide outrage.

At the same time, receiving a notice does not by itself mean that a person has been removed from the electoral roll. The Election Commission has said voters whose records are flagged can submit documents and have their entries verified. Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta, for instance, was issued a notice over an age-related discrepancy, but the EC subsequently said her details had been verified and her inclusion in the final roll confirmed.

The distinction is important because the exercise has affected a very large number of voters. More than 31.6 lakh electors have been issued notices over “logical discrepancies” or because their records could not be linked to the previous SIR roll, while 47.6 lakh names were left out of the draft electoral roll published on 31 August.

The notices therefore do not, on their own, establish that the electoral records of those named are invalid. But the sheer number of cases, including among people with long-established public records and political or administrative careers, has drawn attention to the reliability of the mapping and verification process.

The issue is also now before the Supreme Court. A petition has sought disclosure of the names of voters served notices and the criteria used to classify electors under categories such as “logical discrepancies” and “No Mapping”. The court is scheduled to hear the matter on 22 September.

The final electoral roll is scheduled to be published after the claims and objections process and subsequent verification. Until then, the notices represent a requirement to establish or verify eligibility rather than a final decision to delete a voter's name.

The reported cases come amid a much wider verification exercise in Delhi. The Delhi Chief Electoral Officer said 31,63,930 notices had been generated as of Saturday for voters whose records could not be linked with the previous revision or contained “logical discrepancies”.

The Election Commission has said receiving a notice does not by itself mean that a voter has been excluded from the electoral roll. Those served notices can submit replies and supporting documents to the concerned Electoral Registration Officer. The disposal of the notices is scheduled to be completed by 29 October, with the final electoral roll due on 4 November.

The SIR has already attracted scrutiny over the scale and basis of the notices. A petition before the Supreme Court has sought disclosure of the names of voters served notices and the reasons for categorising them as having “logical discrepancies” or being unmapped. The court is scheduled to hear the matter on 22 September.

The exercise has also produced other unusual cases. Economist Bibek Debroy, who died in November 2024, was reportedly included in the draft electoral roll and subsequently flagged for lack of mapping with the previous SIR roll.

Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta and former chief minister Arvind Kejriwal are also among prominent voters who received notices. The Election Commission subsequently clarified Gupta’s case and said her electoral details had been verified. Kejriwal and four members of his family were flagged under the “unmapped with last SIR” category.

According to the material cited in the reports, more than 47 lakh names were excluded from Delhi’s draft electoral roll, while over 33 lakh voters have been issued notices for discrepancies or lack of mapping.