Tribunal Leadership Change
Justice TS Sivagnanam, formerly the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court, has formally stepped down from his position at the Special Intensive Revision
(SIR) tribunal. The resignation, submitted on personal grounds, marks the end of his tenure at a body tasked with addressing electoral appeal cases. He communicated his decision to both the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court, Sujoy Paul, and the Election Commission, indicating the administrative and electoral implications of his departure. Initially appointed to oversee appeals from the North 24 Parganas and Kolkata districts, Justice Sivagnanam's responsibilities expanded due to Supreme Court referrals, encompassing cases from Malda, Murshidabad, and Birbhum as well. His work at the tribunal aimed to expedite the resolution of these matters, particularly those impacting electoral candidates and their voting rights.
Appeals Processed Swiftly
During his 22-day tenure, Justice Sivagnanam demonstrated remarkable efficiency, processing a substantial 1,777 appeals between April 5 and April 27. Notably, none of these appeals were outright rejected, reflecting a lenient and thorough approach to restoring voting rights. Among the cases he adjudicated was that of Md Mahatab Sheikh, a Congress candidate from Farakka, whose voting rights were successfully reinstated, enabling him to win his seat and become a Member of the Legislative Assembly. Justice Sivagnanam also handled significant cases such as those involving Suprabuddha Sen, grandson of the renowned painter Nandalal Bose, and his wife Deepa Sen, for whom voting rights were also restored. His commitment to impartiality was evident in his diligent work, often extending from 8:30 am to 5 pm daily, including weekends, with no staff support.
Nuns' Voting Rights
A particularly noteworthy aspect of Justice Sivagnanam's work involved adjudicating the appeals of nuns from the Missionaries of Charity. He personally oversaw and approved voting rights for over 30 nuns, facilitating their participation in the electoral process. This decision was made despite potential discrepancies in their documentation, where the certificates provided did not perfectly align with their pre-order life records. Justice Sivagnanam's compassionate approach ensured that these challenges did not become insurmountable barriers to their civic duty. He explicitly stated that he did not reject any of their appeals, emphasizing his commitment to inclusive electoral participation and upholding the rights of all individuals, regardless of their background or professional affiliations.
Colossal Kolkata Backlog
Despite the considerable progress made, Justice Sivagnanam painted a stark picture of the remaining workload, estimating that it would take an additional four years to clear all pending appeals from Kolkata. He revealed that a staggering 100,000 appeals are still awaiting resolution. Challenges encountered included issues with the online appeals portal, which imposed word-count restrictions on lengthy judicial orders. To circumvent this, he adopted a concise, four-to-five-line format for his judgments, a departure from his usual practice. While he is familiar with e-court proceedings, he acknowledged that not all retired judges possess similar technical acumen. He commended the state government's technical support for the 19 tribunals, though he also highlighted a need for a dedicated system feature to notify applicants of their appeal status.
