Supreme Court Declines To Entertain Plea Of Displaced Lucknow's Akbar Nagar Residents Over Voter Roll Exclusion
The Court directed the District Election Officer, Lucknow, to ascertain the facts of the case from the representations submitted by the Petitioners.
The Supreme Court has refused to entertain the plea concerning the exclusion of residents from electoral rolls following the demolition and relocation of the Akbar Nagar locality in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.
The petition was filed by 91 residents of Akbar Nagar who were displaced after a major demolition drive in September 2023. The petitioners argued that they have resided in the area for decades, with many appearing in electoral rolls as far back as 2002.
However, following the demolition of "unauthorised" constructions in the area, a move previously upheld by the courts, they found themselves excluded from the UP Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process.
The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi ordered, "It is also claimed that most petitioners appeared in the electoral roll of 2002, or those who were born thereafter, in subsequent voter list. It is in this light that Petitioners are seeking further time to submit their enumeration forms...Having regard to the disputed facts and situations involved, we are not inclined to entertain a Writ Petition under Article 32...The Petitioners have liberty to approach the BLOs and Election Commissioner, Lucknow. We direct the District Election Commissioner, Lucknow to ascertain the facts of the case and take a decision as per the law. If the petitioner's grievance is not addressed effectively, they may approach the jurisdictional High Court."
Senior Advocate MR Shamshad appeared for the Petitioners.
The Court ordered, "The Petitioners are the residents of Akbar Nagar, Lucknow, where they are resided for decades. It is stated that some demolition drive was taken out in September 2023 on the grounds that these constructions were unauthorized. The matter was taken up before the High Court, where the rehabilitation policy for those affected by the demolition was directed to be framed, and that decision of the High Court was upheld by this Court. It is claimed that the SIR process in UP, the names of the Petitioners are excluded only on the account of the fact that after the demolition drive, they do not have any identifiable..."
The crux of their grievance is that during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Uttar Pradesh, their names are being excluded because they no longer possess an "identifiable residence" at their original, now-demolished site. They sought the Court's intervention to ensure they are issued enumeration forms and allowed to participate in the upcoming elections.
The Court remarked, "Why can these issues not be taken to the High Court?... We cannot understand that."
"The problem is, this is one instance that has come. I have a list of about 15 such instances throughout the country, everything Your Lordships are seized of, so this may be considered here...They are poor people, they have been relocated from one place to another place", Shamshad said.
"We are only on the question of factual enquiry...for factual enquiry you can go to the High Court", Chief Justice Kant said.
Counsel submitted, "The Election Commission is here."
To which the Chief Justice said, "No, this will open Pandora's Box."
The Bench noted that the case involves "seriously disputed facts"—such as the specific residency status and age of the petitioners—which require a detailed evidentiary review. The Court said that local electoral issues should first be addressed by the relevant administrative and judicial bodies within the state.
The District Election Officer (DEO), Lucknow, was directed to ascertain the facts of the case from the representations submitted by the residents and take remedial steps according to the law. Petitioners were granted liberty to approach the Booth Level Officers (BLOs) and the Election Commissioner in Lucknow. If the DEO fails to address the grievance effectively, the residents have the liberty to approach the Allahabad High Court for further relief.
Cause Title: Sana Praveen and Ors. v. Election Commission of India [W.P.(C) No. 191/2025]