The Election Commission of India (ECI) on Friday assured the Bombay High Court that it currently has sufficient volunteers and does not require additional personnel from private unaided schools, addressing concerns raised by the Unaided Schools Forum. The forum had challenged the state's requisitioning of their teachers for duty as Booth Level Officers (BLOs) during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter list in Maharashtra.
Background of the Petition
The Unaided Schools Forum approached the High Court after the Election Commission issued show cause notices to teachers from private unaided institutions for not reporting for BLO duties. The forum feared coercive action, including FIRs, citing recent Mumbai Police action against several aided-school teachers who failed to report earlier this month. The SIR exercise is part of the third phase of voter list revision, with the final electoral roll scheduled for publication on October 7.
ECI's Statement in Court
Former Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni, representing the ECI, submitted before a bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad: "We have enough volunteers as of now and so do not need any more. The petitioners need not have any apprehensions." However, senior counsel Janak Dwarkadas, appearing for the forum, raised objections, questioning the identity of these volunteers. "They could well be our teachers," Dwarkadas said, expressing concern over potential coercive action against teachers.
Legal Arguments
Kumbhakoni argued that the exercise is a "national duty" and that private unaided institutions are not exempt. Dwarkadas countered, stating that the law specifically provides for employees of aided and government-run institutions to be requisitioned, questioning whether even a 75-year-old could be roped in under such provisions. He also contested the state's reliance on the Right to Education Act as a source of power to requisition private teachers.
Court's Response
The High Court recorded Kumbhakoni's statement, noting that it could assuage the petitioners' fears for now. The matter was adjourned for further hearing, with directions for affidavits in reply and rejoinder to be filed by the next date.
