Saf_Tweets

CJI: how many booths? Naidu: 15000 booths CJI: let's say you have 200 blocks, every block should have this list of 43 lakhs...those who have not been able to fill form. So wherever you go, that list should be readily available. So that person who has shifted is able to find out that name is missing. then he can be asked to fill Form 8. Verification we understand. Naidu: Their apprehension is Form 6 declaration CJI: Your 1 statement or circular in simple language can clarify that Form 6 is required to be filled by only those who want first time enrolment in Delhi J Bagchi: In Bihar SIR, we said ECI has residual power. But You can't touch Forms. Form 6, 7 and 8 are cast in stone. You can add points. [You can ask for] A declaration by the person when he is making claim/objection why you did not respond. Mr Bhushan, it's a wise constitutional authority. What they have independent spl. revision where they are putting 2003 as cutting mark and then verifying entries. We are not commenting on the LD. What's really a concern is...rule 13 of Rules...they have not gone by Rule 13...their argument was rules are not governing SIR process...there must be some application of mind as to why an elector to whom enumeration form has been given, did not respond. Your characterization is exhaustive. But there may be residual characterization. That person could not respond. Reason for non-responding can be given Naidu: Every step of SIR this court has watched. In Bihar [...] J Bagchi: Bihar SIR is not a binding precedent. There ECI had not undertaken LD as a category. We have permitted you in Bengal as interim arrangement. We have not finally adjudicated on legality of LD. We don't want to make further comment. A man in 2003 list - how can this SIR reopen his entry on LD? A question which never fell for question in Bihar judgment [...].