SC to hear TMC plea against ECI counting staff order for West Bengal polls
Synopsis
The TMC has rushed to the Supreme Court just days before counting for the West Bengal Assembly elections, after the Calcutta High Court refused to block the ECI's order deploying Central government and PSU employees as counting supervisors. Saturday's bench hearing could reshape last-minute counting arrangements — and test the limits of judicial intervention in a live electoral process.
Key Takeaways
The Supreme Court will hear TMC 's petition on Saturday, 3 May 2025 , against the Calcutta High Court order upholding the ECI 's counting staff decision.
A bench of Justices P.S.
Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi will take up the matter.
The Calcutta High Court dismissed the TMC's writ petition on 2 May 2025 , ruling the ECI's authority to appoint Central government/PSU employees as counting supervisors was legally sound.
The ECI directive mandated at least one Central government/PSU employee at each counting table as supervisor or assistant.
The High Court held that the TMC retains the right to challenge results via an election petition under Section 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 .
Senior Advocate Kalyan Bandopadhyay argued the directive was arbitrary and West Bengal-specific .
The Supreme Court of India is scheduled to hear on Saturday, 3 May 2025, a petition filed by the All India Trinamool Congress (TMC) challenging a Calcutta High Court order that upheld the Election Commission of India (ECI)'s decision to appoint Central government and Central Public Sector Undertaking (PSU) employees as counting supervisors and assistants for the West Bengal Assembly elections. The matter will be heard by a bench comprising Justices P.S. Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi, as per the apex court's cause list.
Background: What the Calcutta High Court Ruled
A single-judge bench of Justice Krishna Rao of the Calcutta High Court dismissed the TMC's writ petition in its entirety on Friday, 2 May 2025, after reserving judgment on Thursday. The court upheld the ECI's authority to deploy Central government and PSU personnel as counting staff, ruling that no illegality had occurred.
Point of View
Which the High Court explicitly ruled out. What this episode reveals is the deepening institutional distrust between the TMC-led West Bengal government and the Union government's administrative machinery — a tension that will outlast this election cycle regardless of Saturday's outcome.
NationPress
6 Jul 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why has the TMC approached the Supreme Court over West Bengal election counting staff?
The TMC has challenged an ECI directive requiring at least one Central government or PSU employee at each counting table as supervisor or assistant, arguing it gives an unfair advantage to the BJP-led Union government. The Calcutta High Court dismissed this challenge on 2 May 2025, prompting the TMC to escalate to the Supreme Court.
What did the Calcutta High Court rule on the ECI counting staff order?
The Calcutta High Court upheld the ECI's authority to appoint Central government and PSU employees as counting supervisors and assistants, finding no illegality in the directive. Justice Krishna Rao ruled that Clause 15.7.9 of the handbook for Returning Officers permits such appointments from either Central or state government officials.
Who will hear the TMC's petition in the Supreme Court?
A bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi will hear the matter on Saturday, 3 May 2025, as listed on the Supreme Court's official cause list.
What remedy does the TMC have if its Supreme Court petition fails?
The Calcutta High Court noted that if irregularities occur during counting, the TMC can challenge results through an election petition under Section 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, after declaration of results.
What is the TMC's core legal argument against the ECI directive?
Senior Advocate Kalyan Bandopadhyay argued that the ECI's own handbook does not mandate Central government personnel for counting supervisor and assistant roles — only micro-observers carry that requirement. The TMC contended the directive was arbitrary and West Bengal-specific.
