Don’t assume 2.07 crore voters are permanently out: Maharashtra CEO on SIR

What is the final breakup of the 2.07 crore Uncollectable EFs?

The category-wise breakup is 75.52 lakh absent/not found, 76.80 lakh permanently shifted, 34.81 lakh dead, 17.63 lakh already enrolled elsewhere/duplicate and 2.23 lakh others. The draft rolls are being published on the websites of the respective district collectors so that people can check their names. The lists are also being made available to booth level agents of political parties through the concerned election authorities. But these are various stages of the process. We are not claiming 100 per cent accuracy at this stage.

What verification was done before these voters were put in the Uncollectable category?

The BLOs were expected to visit the elector at least once and if not found, thrice. After that, depending on what was established, the case was categorised. If somebody is absent/not found, we simply do not know what has happened to that person. The person may have shifted somewhere else or he may be absent due to some other reason. In the case of permanently shifted, we have information that the person has actually moved from that address. For deceased cases, we depend on the records available to us, including official death records like death certificates or reports from family members. For already enrolled elsewhere/duplicate, the person’s name is already present in another Assembly Constituency elsewhere in the electoral roll. The provisional lists are being published. BLOs were instructed to verify such information and obtain Forms 6 or 8 from eligible electors wherever necessary.”

Could genuine voters have been wrongly classified as Uncollectable?

There can be practical issues. In urban areas, for example, some people come home only after 7.30 or 8 pm. There is a huge population which is not available during the normal working hours. Our BLOs cannot necessarily work until 9 pm. Many of our BLOs are women, so there are practical limitations.
That is why I am saying these are various stages of a process. We are not claiming complete accuracy at this point. The August 31 roll is only a draft. If somebody feels that something is wrong, it can be corrected. It is not only the responsibility of a few. Every voter in the constituency should verify and check the draft.

What happens when a voter is registered in two places or mapping shows another registration?

The system has centralised mapping. But mapping does not mean that every case can simply be branded as deliberate duplication.

Suppose a person has a registration in Maharashtra and there is another record somewhere else. The system can identify the mapping, but an individual case may still require verification or an individual application. You cannot simply delete somebody’s name without following the prescribed process. If there is a confirmed duplicate registration, the duplicate entry will be cancelled.

What about existing voters who were studying or working abroad or temporarily outside Maharashtra during enumeration?

Their being away during the enumeration exercise does not mean that they should simply lose their right to be on the electoral roll. They should check the draft. If they find that their name is missing, they can use the claims process. There is also an online mechanism for applications. However, if there is a discrepancy between Aadhaar and the voter record, a paper process has to be used.

If an existing voter finds their name missing from the draft, which form should they use?

After publication of the draft, there will be one month for claims and objections. There are three forms.

Form 6 is for inclusion, Form 7 is for deletion, and Form 8 is for correction or modification.

An elector whose name does not appear in the draft can apply for inclusion through Form 6 along with the prescribed declaration and supporting documents. If there is a correction required in an entry, Form 8 can be used. If an elector wants to object to inclusion of an entry, that is, for deletion, Form 7 can be used.

What is the biggest misconception about the 2.07 crore figure?

The biggest misconception is to look at 2.07 crore as the number of people who will be deleted. Around 17 lakh had names in more than one place, hence, deletion at one place does not mean that person is removed from the entire electoral roll. Their name may be elsewhere too. Secondly, looking at this number as very high. Around 34 lakhs are found to be dead, removal of their name is nothing but clearing of rolls. What is relevant is whether every person who is eligible to be on the electoral roll is there.

That is why we have provided multiple opportunities: publication of the expected deletions with reasons, publication of the draft roll and then the claims and objections process.

The objective is to ensure that everyone who is eligible to be on the roll is there.