Calcutta High Court dismisses TMC plea against use of central employees as counting supervisors
The Calcutta High Court dismissed a TMC petition challenging the decision to deploy central government employees as vote-counting supervisors in the West Bengal assembly elections. The court said other counting-related personnel would be present in the counting room and found no illegality in appointing central counting staff, while allowing TMC to pursue an election petition if it gathers proof of vote manipulation. Polling has concluded in West Bengal with counting scheduled for May 4.
Why It Matters
This ruling sustains the deployment arrangement for counting staff, which has implications for election administration and perceived neutrality during vote counting.
Timeline
3 Events
Polls concluded and counting scheduled
The report states that polling has concluded in West Bengal and that the counting of votes is scheduled to take place on May 4, 2026.
Calcutta High Court dismisses TMC petition challenging central counting supervisors
The Calcutta High Court, in a judgment by Justice Krishna Rao, dismissed the Trinamool Congress (TMC) petition challenging the electoral office's order to deploy only Central government employees as vote-counting supervisors in the West Bengal assembly elections. The court rejected TMC's claim that central government employees would be susceptible to BJP influence, noting that micro observers, counting agents, and other personnel will also be present in the counting room, and that counting supervisors/assistants from the Central Government would be the only ones not in the room. It said there was no illegality in appointing a counting supervisor and a counting assistant from the Central Government and stated that TMC can file an election petition if it can prove central government employees are helping BJP by manipulating votes.
Earlier TMC petition challenging EO's order
The article notes that a petition moved earlier by the TMC challenged the Additional Chief Electoral Officer's order, arguing that at least one counting supervisor or counting assistant at each counting table should be a Central Government/Central PSU employee and that the electoral officer may not have jurisdiction to issue the order.