Facts
The petitioner, a mason working in Bhutan, challenged the deletion of his name from the Voters’ List on March 27, 2026
Source reference: p. 2The petitioner asserted that without a valid citizenship document or inclusion in the Voters' List, he would be unable to provide necessary credentials to his employer or pass immigration checkpoints at the Bhutan border under prevailing rules
Source reference: p. 2Consequently, he filed an "SIR Appeal" (No. APS2501G310326226346) which remained pending
Source reference: p. 2The petitioner approached the High Court seeking a direction for the expedited disposal of said appeal
Source reference: p. 2Issues
1. Whether the SIR Appellate Tribunal should be directed to accord an out-of-turn or expedited hearing for the petitioner’s appeal due to his professional exigencies and immigration requirements
Source reference: p. 2-3Law Applied
The Court relied on Article 226 of the Constitution of India regarding its writ jurisdiction.
Source reference: p. 2-3Applied the precedents set by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Monowara Khatun vs. ECI & Ors. (WP(C) 496/2026) and Mostari Banu vs. ECI & Ors. (WP(C) 1089/2025).
Source reference: p. 2-3These precedents established that individuals aggrieved by exclusion from voter lists in the SIR process may seek urgent administrative or judicial intervention, and Appellate Tribunals may be requested to grant out-of-turn hearings based on the urgency of the matter.
Source reference: p. 3Reasoning
The Court examined the petitioner’s work permit and contract (Annexures P5 and P16), noting the urgency created by his employment in Bhutan.
Source reference: p. 2Applying the ratio from the Supreme Court orders in Monowara Khatun and Mostari Banu, the Court recognized that the petitioner's inability to prove citizenship status at immigration or to his employer constituted sufficient urgency.
Source reference: p. 3Rather than adjudicating on the merits of the voter list deletion, the Court focused on the procedural remedy of "out-of-turn" disposal specifically permitted by the Apex Court for SIR-related appeals.
Source reference: p. 3Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition by requesting the SIR Appellate Tribunal to decide the petitioner’s SIR Appeal as expeditiously as possible.
No order was made as to costs, and the parties were directed to act upon the server copy of the judgment.
Source reference: p. 3-4Original Court PDF
EKRAMUL HAQUEvsTHE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in