Telangana HC Declines To Intervene in Voter Deletion Plea, Cites SIR Process
The court says SIR offers a statutory remedy for voter inclusion and electoral roll corrections
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Tuesday declined to intervene in a plea challenging the deletion of a Hyderabad family's names from the electoral roll, holding that the ongoing special intensive revision (SIR) provided a complete statutory mechanism for inclusion and correction of electoral roll, making writ intervention unwarranted at this stage.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin disposed of the writ petition filed by Hyderabad resident Syed Qutubuddin Masood, who alleged that his vote along with that of his family’s were deleted from the electoral roll, due to which they could not exercise their franchise in the 2024 general elections.
According to him, he made several representations in 2025, but his name was not restored on the electoral roll. He requested the court to direct the Election Commission of India (ECI) to devise and implement a specific form, procedure, redressal grievance system for adjudicating the application forms complaining about the wrongful or negligent deletion of voters list. The family, originally registered as voters in the Bahadurpura/Charminar Assembly constituency, claimed to have remained enrolled continuously.
The petitioner said that without immediate restoration of their names in the roll, it would be impossible for him and his family members to properly identify and map their records during the 2026 revision.
ECI counsel submitted to the court that the SIR provided options for inclusion of voters whose names have been missing from the electoral roll. Since the petitioner and his family had been mapped in the last SIR conducted in 2002, they could submit their enumeration forms to the respective BLOs and enroll themselves. The ECI submitted that eligible persons can submit enumeration forms for inclusion in the draft electoral roll, scheduled to be published on July 31.
Recording these submissions, the court observed that the SIR process itself provided a statutory procedure for inclusion and correction of electoral rolls. In view of the availability of an effective alternative remedy, the court held that it was not inclined to intervene in the electoral revision process by exercising its extraordinary writ jurisdiction.
The court accordingly directed the petitioner and his family members to submit the prescribed forms during the ongoing revision exercise. It clarified that if their names are still not included in the electoral roll after completion of the revision process, they would be at liberty to avail of the appellate remedies available under the election laws before the competent authorities and, thereafter, seek appropriate legal recourse in accordance with law.
