Polity · 23 Aug 2026

Article 324 ECI electoral roll revision

Consider the following statements:

  1. Article 324 of the Constitution vests the Election Commission of India with the power of superintendence, direction and control of elections, which the Supreme Court held includes conducting periodic special revisions of electoral rolls.
  2. The Supreme Court's direction to the ECI to refer deleted names to the Union Home Ministry for further adjudication is an express requirement laid down under the Representation of the People Act, 1950.
  3. Voters excluded during the Special Intensive Revision were categorised, among other classifications, as "Shifted," "Absent," or "Duplicate."
AOnly one
BOnly two
COnly three
DNone
This question is based on: What the Supreme Court Actually Said - and Didn't Say - About Excluding Voters
Take this in full test mode → Instructions for 23 Aug 2026
About this question

Why in news

The Supreme Court's ruling on the ECI's Special Intensive Revision has come under scrutiny as West Bengal's tribunals face a backlog of citizens contesting their exclusion from electoral rolls, with excluded voters facing a further Home Ministry referral process.

Why for UPSC

This tests the classic Prelims distinction between what a constitutional provision actually mandates versus an administrative practice a judgment merely permits without requiring - a frequent source of "which of these is actually in the Constitution/Act" traps.

Prelims summary

Article 324 gives the ECI wide superintendence over elections, judicially upheld to include periodic Special Intensive Revisions; the Home Ministry referral for deleted names is an executive/administrative practice, not one mandated by Article 324 or the RPA, 1950.

On web, answers are shown once after a test — no save or reattempt. For unlimited reattempts, Hindi medium, and Mentor Observations, use the TAN App.