West Bengal SIR: ECI signals action after official questions process in public

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has indicated possible action against Mousam Sarkar, Assistant Electoral Registration Officer (AERO) of Bagnan Assembly constituency, for publicly questioning alleged logical discrepancies in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process, an official said on Monday (January 12, 2026).

Mr. Sarkar, who is also Block Disaster Management Officer of Bagnan Block-II, had raised concerns over the SIR exercise. The Office of the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of West Bengal did not take the remarks lightly and posted on X, suggesting that disciplinary action could be initiated against him.

Responding to the development, Mr. Sarkar said he has not yet received any official communication. “I have not received any letter so far. I will respond appropriately once I receive it,” he said.

In a detailed post on X, the office of the CEO West Bengal stated that if Mr. Sarkar had any grievances, he should have raised them with his superior officers or formally approached the District Election Officer following due procedure. It said that in such a case, he could have been transferred to another posting. Instead, it alleged that Mr. Sarkar violated service discipline.

According to the CEO’s office, the matter amounts to indiscipline, violation of rules and disrespect towards a constitutional authority.

“He is currently an employee of the Election Commission, and appropriate action will be taken against him as per law,” the post by the CEO office said.

Mr. Sarkar defended his action, saying, “It was necessary in the interest of the public. Other officers should also speak up. Otherwise, the public will suffer greatly”.

On January 8, Mr. Sarkar had written to the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) Bagnan, alleging logical discrepancies in the AERO log and resigning from the post of AERO.

In his letter, he alleged that discrepancies in name spellings flagged during the SIR process date back to 2002 and were later corrected by voters themselves using Form 8, in accordance with ECI rules. He claimed similar corrections were made in cases of age-related discrepancies, leading to the current inconsistencies being highlighted.