SC junks postal ballot plea for students, CJI cites fellow judge who travels to vote
The manual on electoral rolls provides a framework for students seeking to exercise their voting rights while residing away from their homes for educational purposes.
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking postal ballot rights for students residing outside their native places, citing the example of one of its own judges who travels back home to cast his vote.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, along with justice Sanjay Kumar, underscored that the current postal ballot system is reserved for specific categories such as defence personnel and the elderly.
As the bench deliberated on the issue, CJI Khanna pointed to justice Kumar and remarked, “Look at my brother judge, who goes back to his native place to cast his vote.”
Justice Kumar, concurring with the CJI’s remarks, shared his own experience. “I travel to my hometown (Hyderabad) to cast my ballot,” he said. Justice Kumar also noted that many individuals in different cities due to employment or other constraints face the same situation. The choice, he added, is straightforward — either travel to the native place to vote or apply for a voter registration transfer to the current place of residence, in accordance with regulations.
The PIL, filed by petitioner Arnab Kumar Mullick and argued by advocate PK Mullick, raised concerns about students’ ability to participate meaningfully in elections if they were disconnected from the local issues of their registered constituency. The counsel further suggested adopting the electronic voting model available for Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) to facilitate students’ voting rights.
However, the bench firmly rejected this proposition. “We can’t help this,” retorted the bench, while emphasising that the Election Commission of India (ECI) already provides a mechanism for students residing outside their constituency to register as voters at their current location. The manual on electoral rolls specifically allows students living in hostels, messes, or lodges to enroll as voters at their place of study, provided they meet the eligibility criteria.
The Supreme Court’s order, consequently, upheld the existing electoral provisions and dismissed the petition, stating: “In view of the manual on electoral rolls and the concerned provision in it, we aren’t inclined to proceed further with this writ petition, and it is dismissed.”
The manual on electoral rolls provides a framework for students seeking to exercise their voting rights while residing away from their homes for educational purposes. According to clause 13.6.1.3, students who live in hostels, lodges or messes on a continuous basis, returning home only for short periods, can be considered ordinarily resident at their place of study. This allows them to register as voters in their host city or town, provided they submit an application along with a bona fide certificate from the head of their educational institution.
Simultaneously, students also have the option to retain their enrollment at their family residence if they prefer. The manual clarifies that students enrolled in courses recognised by central or state authorities for at least one year are eligible for such registration. This provision ensures that students are not disenfranchised due to their temporary relocation for education while maintaining flexibility in choosing where to cast their vote.