An Intervention Application has been moved before the Supreme Court of India, objecting to the personal appearance of West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee in proceedings concerning the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in the State.
The application has been filed by Satish Kumar Aggarwal, Vice President of Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha, seeking permission to assist the Court on what is described as an issue of serious constitutional and institutional significance.
The matter is listed for hearing before a Bench led by Justice Surya Kant.
Challenge to the Personal Appearance of the Sitting Chief Minister
The applicant has questioned the propriety of a sitting Chief Minister personally addressing the Supreme Court in a petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution.
It has been contended that the dispute relating to the SIR process is neither personal nor private in nature, but directly concerns the constitutional functioning of the State and the powers of the Election Commission of India.
According to the plea, once the issues involve State governance and inter-constitutional authority relations, the Chief Minister cannot claim to appear in an individual capacity.
Any submissions, it is argued, ought to be made exclusively through duly appointed counsel representing the State of West Bengal.
Allegation of Institutional Impropriety
The intervention application asserts that personal appearance by a constitutional functionary holding executive office, despite being assisted by a full team of senior advocates, is institutionally undesirable and contrary to long-standing judicial conventions.
The plea emphasizes that constitutional courts are best served when adjudication remains depersonalized and conducted through professional legal representation.
It has further been submitted that such appearances risk creating symbolic pressure on the Court, potentially disturbing the delicate balance mandated by the doctrine of separation of powers.
The applicant warns that even a perception of executive influence must be carefully avoided to preserve the neutrality and dignity of constitutional adjudication.
Maintainability of Article 32 Petition Questioned
The application also challenges the maintainability of the Chief Minister’s writ petition under Article 32, stating that no fundamental right of the petitioner has been infringed to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the Supreme Court against the Election Commission.
Additionally, reference has been made to the significance of the SIR exercise in West Bengal, with claims that reports indicate large-scale migration of illegal immigrants seeking to evade scrutiny under the revision process.
Case Details
The intervention application has been drafted by Advocate Barun Kumar Sinha and filed through Advocate on Record Anantha Narayana MG.
The Supreme Court is expected to consider the constitutional objections when the SIR matter is taken up for hearing.
Bench Details
- Chief Justice of India: Justice Surya Kant
- Court: Supreme Court of India
Parties Involved
- Petitioner in main case: Mamata Banerjee, Chief Minister of West Bengal
- Respondent: Election Commission of India
- Intervenor Applicant: Satish Kumar Aggarwal, Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha
Follow Mahamana News For More Recent Judgments
