West Bengal SIR appeals must now be shown as a pipe — pending, decided, in, out, allowed, updated — not one disposal total.

A Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana on Tuesday, 25 August 2026, directed the Election Commission of India to file a detailed break-up of appeals before West Bengal Special Intensive Revision tribunals. The break-up asked for is pending appeals, disposed appeals, inclusion, exclusion, allowed appeals, and roll updates. A pipeline in parts is the Tuesday demand. A single disposal total is what the bench declined to treat as enough. Directing a break-up is not a finding that the Commission’s tribunals have failed, and it is not a finding that any name was wrongly struck.

Petitioners cited a Right to Information reply: about 83,000 appeals decided and 75,443 names restored. Another hearing report put disposal at around 85,000. Those are two writings. This desk will not merge about 83,000 with around 85,000 into one invented disposal figure. Seventy-five thousand four hundred forty-three restored names sit on the petitioners’ Right to Information citation. They do not sit on the second hearing report as locked here. The court did not validate the petitioner figures itself. It did not impose a final disposal timeline on Tuesday.

West Bengal is the roll geography. New Delhi is the court. Special Intensive Revision appeals are tribunal work. Inclusion and exclusion are opposite doors. An allowed appeal is not automatically a roll update until the update is written. That is why the bench asked for both allowed cases and roll updates as separate columns. This page will not collapse “allowed” into “updated”.

Form B and any poll date are not notified. A Special Intensive Revision appeal book is a roll process. It is not an election notification. This desk will not invent a West Bengal Assembly or Lok Sabha date, a constituency-wise table, or a court-certified 83,000 or 85,000.

About 83,000 decided is a petitioner figure tied to a Right to Information reply. Around 85,000 disposed is a hearing-report estimate. The 2,000-odd gap between those two writings is why this desk keeps them apart. Restored names at 75,443 are a third number, and they travel only with the Right to Information citation. This page will not subtract 75,443 from either disposal total and print an invented still-out figure. The Election Commission of India has been asked for its own columns. Those columns are not on the Tuesday record yet.

Until the Election Commission of India files the break-up, the public ledger is a Tuesday direction for pending, disposed, inclusion, exclusion, allowed and roll-update columns, a petitioner Right to Information citation of about 83,000 decided and 75,443 restored, a separate hearing report of around 85,000 disposed, a bench that validated neither figure, no final disposal timeline, and a court of the Chief Justice of India with Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana. The two appeal totals remain two. The roll is not a notified poll.