Bihar SIR exercise: SC refuses to stay process, asks ECI to continue accepting Aadhaar & voter ID
Supreme Court
on Monday refused to pass an
interim order
staying the publication of the draft electoral roll in Bihar, stating that it will take a final view on the matter after hearing all parties in detail.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi allowed the
Election Commission of India
(ECI) to proceed with the process of linking Aadhaar and
voter ID
under the
Special Intensive Revision
(SIR) exercise in the state, in line with its earlier directions.
Explore courses from Top Institutes in
Please select course:
Select a Course Category
Others
Degree
Finance
Digital Marketing
CXO
Healthcare
Operations Management
PGDM
Leadership
Design Thinking
Public Policy
Project Management
MBA
healthcare
Cybersecurity
Technology
Data Science
Management
Data Analytics
Product Management
Artificial Intelligence
MCA
Data Science
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
16 Weeks
Indian School of Business
CERT-ISB Transforming HR with Analytics & AI India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
9 months
IIM Lucknow
SEPO - IIML CHRO India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
28 Weeks
MICA
CERT-MICA SBMPR Async India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
7 Months
S P Jain Institute of Management and Research
CERT-SPJIMR Exec Cert Prog in AI for Biz India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
9 months
IIM Lucknow
SEPO - IIML CHRO India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
'The ECI will continue to accept Aadhaar and voter ID documents for the purpose of the SIR exercise in Bihar as per our earlier order,' the court said.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Highlights from Bollywood 2025 that captured attention
medianet.app
Learn More
Undo
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Assent to bills: Tamil Nadu govt moves SC, says Presidential reference is 'appeal in disguise'
New Delhi, The Tamil Nadu government on Monday urged the Supreme Court to declare the Presidential reference raising constitutional issues on whether timelines could be imposed for dealing with bills passed by state assemblies as not maintainable and return it as unanswered, saying it is an "appeal in disguise". Assent to bills: Tamil Nadu govt moves SC, says Presidential reference is 'appeal in disguise' A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India B R Gavai, which has sought the replies of the Centre and all states in a week, will consider the Presidential reference on Tuesday and would fix timelines and other procedural details for hearing. In an intervention application, the Tamil Nadu government said it is "filing the present application for directions from this court to declare that the Presidential Reference dated May 13, 2025 issued by her excellency, the President of India is not maintainable and to return the said reference as unanswered in whole, without prejudice to the arguments advanced by the Appellant before this Court". It said the President has made the above Presidential reference under the Article 143 of the Constitution of India seeking the opinion of this Court on 14 questions that include the interpretation of the powers of the governor under the Article 200 of the Constitution and the powers of the President under the Article 201 of the Constitution along with ancillary issues. "It is prima-facie evident that the present Presidential reference is nothing but an appeal in disguise to disturb the settled law and overrule the findings already pronounced by this Court due to which the present Presidential reference ceases to raise any such legitimate substantial questions of law leading to an expediency in obtaining the opinion of this Court. "Therefore, the Presidential reference dated May 13, 2025 deserves to be unanswered as a whole and liable to be returned," the state government said. On July 22, the bench also comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar observed that the issues raised in the Presidential reference will affect the "entire country". The Tamil Nadu government in its application further said the Presidential reference raises questions of law pertaining to interpretation of the powers of the governor and the President along with ancillary issues which have been directly answered by the Supreme Court in April 8 verdict in the case of State of Tamil Nadu versus the Governor of Tamil Nadu in an exhaustive manner. It said the Presidential reference was issued by the President merely one month after April 8, 2025 that is the date of pronouncement of the judgement. "A cursory view of the whereas clauses forming the Presidential reference would reflect that the above reference has been issued to overrule the decision and directions of this Court in State of Tamil Nadu judgement and make it clear that the above Presidential reference is nothing but an appeal in disguise, which is impermissible in law as this court has no power to overrule its own judgements by way of Article 143," the plea said. The state government said the present Presidential reference is "headless and devoid of merit" and currently, no review or curative petition has been preferred by the governor of Tamil Nadu against the judgement of this court. Meanwhile, the Kerala government has also sought dismissal of the Presidential reference and said it cannot be used to overrule findings of law and facts in earlier judgments. In May, President Droupadi Murmu exercised powers under Article 143 to know from the top court whether timelines could be imposed by judicial orders for exercise of discretion by the President while dealing with the bills passed by state assemblies. The President's decision comes in light of the April 8 verdict of the apex court passed in a matter over the powers of governor in dealing with bills questioned by the Tamil Nadu government. The verdict for the first time prescribed that the President should decide on the bills reserved for her consideration by the governor within three months from the date on which such reference is received. In a five-page reference, President Murmu posed 14 questions to the Supreme Court and sought to know its opinion on powers of governor, President under Articles 200 and 201 in dealing with bills passed by the state legislature. The verdict has set a timeline for all governors to act on the bills passed by the state assemblies and ruled that the governor does not possess any discretion in exercise of functions under Article 200 of the Constitution in respect to any bill presented to them and must mandatorily abide by the advice tendered by the council of ministers. It had said state governments can directly approach the Supreme Court if the President withholds assent on a bill sent by a governor for consideration. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
NDTV
2 hours ago
- NDTV
3 Reasons Why Bihar Roll Revision Can't Be Discussed In Parliament: Sources
New Delhi: There will be no discussion on Bihar voter list revision in Parliament despite the Opposition's demand, the government has indicated, underscoring a reason cited by former Speaker Balaram Jakhar, sources have said. The Opposition, which has been sticking to its demand for a discussion on Bihar's SIR, had raised the issue again today, and the row had delayed the discussion on Operation Sindoor. The Opposition wanted a concrete assurance from the government that it would discuss the Special Intensive Revision of Bihar's electoral rolls immediately after the special discussion on Operation Sindoor ends. At the time, the government had accused the Opposition of cheating. Later, at 2 pm, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said if the rules allow and the Speaker is ready and it is decided in the Business Advisory Committee, the government was ready to discuss any topic. Because the government did not directly say it would discuss the issue of Bihar SIR, or refuse it, the Opposition found the assurance sufficient and the discussion on Operation Sindoor started in the Lok Sabha. Government sources, however, made it clear that the voter list revision -- being run by the Election Commission in Bihar -- cannot be discussed in Parliament. About this, three arguments are being considered by the government, sources said. The first is that the campaign being run by the Central Election Commission is not an election reform. Rather, it is an administrative step and the Election Commission has been taking such steps from time to time. The second reason is that even if a discussion is held in both the houses of Parliament on the intensive revision of the voter list, there is no one to answer the questions that the Opposition could raise. The Election Commission cannot come to the House to present its side, sources pointed out. And although the Law Ministry is the nodal ministry for the Election Commission, it generally looks after only administrative work, and does not interfere in policy matters. The third reason the government gave is that there are many such institutions which do not have a mechanism to present their side before the Parliament. In such situations, there cannot be a discussion about those institutions, sources said. Government sources recounted an earlier instance when there had been a demand to discuss the functioning of the Election Commission. In 1986, then Speaker Balram Jakhar had said comprehensive election reforms can be discussed in Parliament, but it is not possible to discuss administrative processes and decisions. The government is now of the view that the Bihar voter list revision cannot be discussed due to these reasons. The Opposition, however, is very aggressive on this issue and wait is on for the government's formal arguments.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Rajya Sabha rocked by Opposition protests on SIR, adjourned for day
No substantial work could be taken up in the Rajya Sabha on Monday as the Opposition members walked up to the well of the House, raising slogans to demand a discussion on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) being undertaken in poll-bound Bihar and other issues. When the House met for the day, Deputy Chairperson Harivansh announced that he had received several notices for suspension of listed business to discuss matters of urgent importance under Rule 267. He rejected these notices, leading the members from Congress , Trinamool, DMK and other parties to question the move. The Opposition wanted a discussion on SIR, the detention of two nuns from the Durg Railway Station on allegedly false allegations of conversion and trafficking, and other issues. As the slogan shouting continued, the chair adjourned the House till noon. The same scenario took place at noon as Vice Chairperson Ghanshyam Tewari took up the Question Hour. The House was adjourned within minutes as the Opposition raised slogans. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Artificial Intelligence Management MCA healthcare Finance Public Policy Operations Management Technology Others Digital Marketing Cybersecurity CXO Data Science others Data Science PGDM Data Analytics MBA Design Thinking Healthcare Leadership Degree Product Management Project Management Skills you'll gain: Duration: 7 Months S P Jain Institute of Management and Research CERT-SPJIMR Exec Cert Prog in AI for Biz India Starts on undefined Get Details When the House assembled again at 2pm, Vice Chairperson Bhubaneswar Kalita tried to pacify the members and called Praful Patel (NCP) to speak on the Carriage of Goods by Sea Bill. Opposition members shouted slogans alleging that the government is evading a discussion on key issues like SIR. Since a 16-hour discussion on Operation Sindoor is to be taken up on Tuesday, it is expected to run smoothly in the second half.
