As Kerala completes its special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls ahead of the 2026 assembly elections, Chief Electoral Officer Ratan U Kelkar has defended the exercise amid criticism over workload on booth level officers (BLOs), massive issuance of notices and concerns about errors in the draft rolls.
In a detailed interview with HT, Kelkar talked about the deaths of BLOs that impacted the process, the Election Commission’s refusal to grant extension to Kerala due to the national election calendar, and the challenges posed by the limited participation of booth level agents (BLAs) in the initial stages. He explained why nearly 20 lakh voters received notices despite more than 94% voters being successfully mapped, clarified the verification and hearing process and rejected allegations of arbitrariness.
Kelkar also talked about migration, screening of foreign nationals, the role of Anganwadi workers in digitization and the safeguards built into the system to ensure accuracy and inclusion. Emphasizing that SIR is a verification exercise rather than a punitive process, he said the process applies equally to all citizens, including himself, and underlined that the amendment aims to strengthen the integrity of Kerala’s electoral roll. Edited excerpts:
Why: The deaths of BLOs during this process attracted widespread attention. What effect did it have on exercise?
Answer: The death of the first BLO in Kerala was a turning point. It was a terrifying experience and caused massive trauma. This raised questions about the workload and intensified opposition to the SIR. However, administratively the workload was manageable. The BLO was given 30 days’ time, but the actual fieldwork was barely ten full working days. About 200 houses were assigned to each BLO.
In fact, within the first three days, 13 BLOs – half of whom were women – had completed delivery, billing and collection. But perceptions changed after death. Suddenly it felt like everyone was extremely stressed. Only then did we realize the psychological pressure on the BLO. We had to organize activities to support them and boost morale. I must say, 30 days was more than enough. This would have been difficult if he had also handled departmental responsibilities, but here he was specifically assigned to the SIR.
Why. Kerala did not get extension for SIR despite requests. Why, and what did it mean for the state?
A: The denial of extension was solely due to the 2026 election schedule. Kerala elections are aligned with West Bengal, Assam, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, with notifications, voting and counting conducted simultaneously. Due to this synergy, there was no scope for expansion to Kerala alone. We were told to do whatever we could within the deadline.
This presented challenges, especially in the early stages. BLAs are an important link between the voters and the administration. They know the terrain and are trustworthy voices. During the door-to-door survey, the BLAs were largely unavailable as they were engaged in local elections. If they had been involved earlier, they could have ensured that forms were filled out properly, voters were linked to the 2002 list, and minor issues were resolved at the local level. That support came only during the hearing. With full BLA involvement from the beginning, mapping could have been more than 98%, and many notices could have been avoided.
Why. How did the limited role of BLAs impact the process, and what role did BLOs and Anganwadi workers play?
One. BLAs are important because of their local knowledge and credibility. Their limited initial participation meant that some forms were incomplete and some voters were not added to the 2002 list. This had to be corrected later during the hearing.
BLOs and Anganwadi workers handled the field work. While BLOs were assigned around 200 houses in 30 days, Anganwadi workers faced challenges with digital uploads, as they were not regularly trained in online data entry and connectivity was uneven. Support camps with school and college students as well as field observations helped address this, but the exercise highlighted the need for better preparation when frontline workers are handed digital responsibilities.
Why.You yourself received a notice under SIR. What does this show about the process?
A . This shows that the process is uniform and applies to everyone. I was in Bengaluru during the 2002 revision and joined the service in Kerala only in 2003, hence my name did not appear in the 2002 list. The system flagged it and like any other citizen I also got a notice. I appeared before the authority, submitted the records and the problem was resolved. This is exactly how the system should work. It is about verification based on rules, not based on suspicion.
Why. One purpose of the SIR was to prevent illegal alien citizens from enrolling. What has Kerala achieved so far?
One. After the publication of the draft roll and during the notice and hearing process, we found some cases, mostly involving Nepali citizens. We have not found any cases involving Bangladeshi nationals. If such cases had existed, they would have come to light by now. The objection period is in place to identify and fix such issues, although Kerala does not generally face this problem.
Why. Critics say that there are many errors in the format of the voter list. How do you react?
One. Draft rolls are prone to defects, hence the name ‘draft’. Its purpose is to invite claims and objections so that the errors can be corrected. The most common issue raised is when voters do not receive their names despite voting earlier. Such cases are resolved through prescribed verification process.
Why. Despite more than 94% mapping, around 20 lakh voters received notices. Why so many, and why were urban areas more affected?
One. The 94.5% figure represents voters who were already correctly connected and did not require further verification. The remaining 5-6%, around 20 lakh voters, received notices mainly due to incomplete forms or not being linked to the 2002 list. Many voters assumed that the system or BLO would automatically resolve these deficiencies.
More notices were seen in urban and semi-urban areas because the population is more mobile, communities are less cohesive, and voter participation is lower. Rural areas benefit from stable populations and strong local knowledge, making voter verification easier.
Why.How are notices prepared and what happens during the hearing?
One. Notices are generated by the Election Commission’s digital system when discrepancies are detected in age, gender, parental details or role linkage. AERO or ERO issues notice. The hearing is a verification exercise, not a punitive proceeding.
Voters may be asked to submit documents such as birth certificate, identity proof, or address records. If the authorities are satisfied then exemption from personal appearance can be given. Otherwise, the elector appears briefly before the officer. Even high-profile individuals, including me, had to go through this process if the linkage was missing.
Question 9 . Did you anticipate criticism that the process was intrusive or burdensome?
One. The intensity of this SIR was unprecedented. Earlier amendments were largely passive, relying on voters to flag errors. This time, BLOs went door-to-door, verified the heritage data and digitized the records. Naturally, some voters were dissatisfied.
To reduce concern, we ensured transparency through weekly meetings with political parties, regular media updates, phone-in programs and open offices. Once people understood the intent—accuracy and inclusion, resistance diminished.
Why. How did migration affect the vetting process?
One. A large population of Kerala works outside the state and abroad. The Commission allows personal hearing to be waived if AERO is satisfied through local verification. Foreign voters used passports, and authorized representatives were allowed, ensuring that genuine voters were not inconvenienced.
Migration was also addressed. Legally, a person can only be enrolled in one place. Migrant workers usually retain registration in their home states. Where forms were issued but not returned, entries were treated accordingly. There was no evidence of large-scale double registration.
Why.What is your final message to voters and stakeholders?
One.The objective of SIR is to ensure accuracy, inclusivity and transparency. If you are eligible you will be included in the voter list. This practice isn’t about discomfort; It strengthens democracy.
More than 94% voters were mapped, and discrepancies in the remaining voters are being addressed through notices and hearings. Electoral rolls are living documents that reflect mobility, migration and social change, and this practice strengthens their integrity.
