The Supreme Court on Friday asked several petitioners whose names were deleted from the voters’ list following the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in West Bengal, including 65 who said they were on election duty in the state, to approach the Appellate Tribunals set up to adjudicate such grievances.The directive was issued by a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, even as it refused to entertain the petitioners’ plea against their exclusion from the rolls.Appearing for the petitioners, Senior Advocate M R Shamshad said what was happening was ironical. “A person who is conducting the election can’t vote,” he said, adding there are 65 such petitioners.Shamsad submitted that their duty orders initially mentioned their Electoral Photo Identity Card (EPIC) numbers, but those were subsequently deleted. He contended that there was “ex facie arbitrariness” as they were not given any show-cause notice before their names were deleted.The court, however, asked the petitioners to approach the Tribunals. Justice Bagchi said, “This election, we understand. More valuable right to remain on the rolls, we will examine.”Shamshad said the petitioners had already filed their appeals with the Tribunals on April 5, but those were yet to be taken up. Giving liberty to the petitioners to seek appropriate remedies, the bench went on to dispose of their plea.Meanwhile, hearing another matter in connection with the SIR in West Bengal, the Supreme Court hailed the high voter turnout in the first phase of the state elections Thursday, and noted that the polling was largely peaceful and relatively free of violence.Story continues below this ad“Individually, as a citizen of India, I am very happy to see the percentage of voting…This country, people need to participate in the (democratic process),” CJI Kant said.West Bengal recorded its highest-ever turnout in the first phase of the 2026 Assembly elections Thursday, with 92.88 per cent voting in 152 of the 294 seats, according to the Election Commission.During this hearing, Senior Advocate Kalyan Bandopadhyay, appearing for some petitioners, said the Appellate Tribunals had so far disposed of only 139 appeals. “We need more speedy disposal,” Bandopadhyay submitted.He added, “One good thing is it’s a record 92 per cent voter turnout in West Bengal yesterday. All the migrant labourers from all over India have come back, rushing.”Story continues below this adJustice Bagchi said, “Another thing is there is no violence, or at least…that’s more concern for us”. Bandopadhyay, however, said there were a couple of instances of violence. “Except one or two,” he qualified Justice Bagchi’s remark, adding, “comparatively in West Bengal, (it was a) non-violent vote.”Intervening, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta commended the security forces for ensuring law and order. “I join Mr Bandopadhyay that 92 per cent must be a historic voter turnout. And except for violence in some places, forces have done a commendable job. We must be thankful to them,” Mehta said.Justice Bagchi recalled a verse which meant “the kings fight and the poor men suffer and die”.The CJI said, “When people realise their power in a democracy, the power of the vote, and they follow the rule of law… process and values… then they don’t indulge in violence or anything. Because then they know that my strength lies here in a democratic set-up.”Story continues below this adThe CJI also said “minor incidents here and there” should not affect the fairness of the democratic process. Agreeing, SG Mehta said that “otherwise there was a history of pre and post-poll violence” in the state.Bandopadhyay said, “The main fear in the minds of the voters was that ‘if I don’t cast the vote, I may lose my right’. That has worked out.” SG Mehta, however, said one need not go into the reasons. “We may not go into why they voted. That they voted is a good thing,” he said.Justice Bagchi told Senior Advocate D Naidu, who appeared for the Election Commission, “Mr Naidu, for a change, your client is being applauded by everyone.” Bandopadhyay disagreed and said, “In the last three days, the Election Commission has been rebuked by different courts in the Calcutta High Court.” Both Naidu and Mehta said the comment was “unfair”.Mehta then urged the court to close the hearing, saying that prolonging it would give the parties time to make politically loaded statements.Story continues below this adOn the plea for faster disposal by Appellate Tribunals, the court allowed the parties to approach the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court or the Tribunals.“Most of the issues have been comprehensively answered by order dated April 13, 2026… However, we understand that some issues will continue to arise on a day-to-day basis and may require the attention of either the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court or the Appellate Tribunals. We grant liberty to the petitioners or other stakeholders to approach the Chief Justice of the High Court on the administrative side for redressal of any issues pending,” said the apex court.“With regard to those whose names have been excluded from the voters list…and those who have filed an appeal, directions have been separately issued requesting the Tribunals to accord out-of-turn hearing to such petitioners who have been able to make out a case for urgency,” the court said.