The Calcutta High Court has issued a significant directive to both the Election Commission of India and the West Bengal state government, mandating them to submit detailed reports within a week. This order comes in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) that raises concerns about potential disruptions to the upcoming Assembly elections due to a state public sector undertaking's withdrawal from crucial polling booth infrastructure work.
Court's Directive on Election Infrastructure
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Partha Sarathi Sen heard the PIL filed by Samik Bhattacharya, the state BJP president. The petition highlighted the sudden decision of Macintosh Burn Limited (MBL), a government undertaking under the Public Works Department, to pull out from executing Assured Minimum Facilities (AMF) work in polling booths across West Bengal.
The court emphasized that the Election Commission possesses sufficient authority to ensure all necessary infrastructure is in place for conducting free and fair elections. The bench clearly stated that the responsibility for enabling the polling process ultimately rests with the EC, even if a state PSU withdraws from assisting with election arrangements.
MBL's Withdrawal and Practical Challenges
MBL cited practical considerations for its inability to continue with the AMF work. In a formal letter, the company requested to be relieved from this task, explaining that their infrastructure limitations prevented them from conducting detailed field surveys and holistic assessments required for approximately 81,000 polling booths spread across the state.
The company specifically appealed that no penal, financial, or other adverse actions be initiated against MBL or its officers and directors, emphasizing that their decision stemmed entirely from practical constraints rather than unwillingness to cooperate.
Election Commission's Response and Timeline Concerns
West Bengal's Chief Electoral Officer, Manoj Agarwal, had previously taken MBL to task for refusing to undertake the AMF work despite being entrusted with the responsibility in July of the previous year. The CEO had warned that the Election Commission could initiate criminal proceedings against the company's directors for this refusal.
An Election Commission source pointed out significant timeline concerns, noting that MBL had been assigned the work in July last year, but the government apparently failed to verify the company's capacity to execute such extensive responsibilities. The source emphasized that if the Public Works Department had identified these issues earlier, alternative agencies could have been engaged, potentially saving four crucial months of preparation time.
The official further explained that time is particularly critical as election officials become increasingly occupied with the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. Once election dates are formally declared, the process of floating tenders for such work becomes considerably more complicated, potentially creating logistical challenges in surveying polling booths and identifying gaps in AMF provisions.
Broader Implications for Election Preparedness
This development raises important questions about election preparedness and inter-agency coordination in West Bengal. The court's intervention underscores the judiciary's role in ensuring that administrative and logistical challenges do not compromise the democratic process.
The upcoming reports from both the Election Commission and the West Bengal government will likely address not only the specific issue of MBL's withdrawal but also broader concerns about contingency planning, alternative arrangements, and mechanisms to prevent similar situations in future elections.
As the state prepares for Assembly elections, this case highlights the intricate logistical planning required for conducting elections in India's largest states, where thousands of polling stations must be equipped with proper facilities to ensure voter accessibility and smooth electoral operations.
