A resident of Santa Cruz constituency in North Goa, who works in the private sector, 41-year-old Paresh Salgaoncar doesn’t see himself as a “fighter”.However, in the many legal tangles that the Special Intensive Revision exercise of the Election Commission of India (ECI) is caught in, his petition has emerged as one of the crucial ones, with the Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court saying it is “perturbed” at the way “the rules have been suspended” and wondering about “how many who have not come to court”. On Thursday, it said the ECI must endeavour to ensure that eligible voters are not left out of the electoral rolls.Salgaoncar says all he wanted to do was “not to lie”, which was what the system was asking him to do. His reason for going to court was his apprehension that there were others in the same boat.Also Read | ‘What is the glitch?’: HC asks Election Commission after six names removed from Goa electoral rollsIn Salgaoncar’s case, names of six members of his family in Goa stand deleted from the final electoral roll of the state since their Form 8 applications for change of address were rejected during the SIR.Having voted in several elections, for panchayat, state and Lok Sabha, since 2003, Salgaoncar says: “The ECI is asking a citizen to give a false declaration by insisting that one files Form 6 (which is for new voters) in cases such as mine. It is wrong and against my ethics. Software constraints and ECI guidelines cannot override what is the law. I feel there will be many people whose names are deleted because of this issue and system glitch.”Salgaoncar and his family shifted from their house in Part No. 29 to Part No. 25, within North Goa constituency, over eight years ago. In November last year, when he learnt that house-to-house enumeration had begun for the SIR, he says he contacted the Booth Level Officer (BLO) of his earlier ward to get the forms.Also Read | 8 emails in 7 days, but valid Goa voters still left out: EC’s flawed systemThe BLO told him that since the family was no longer living at that address, they should apply for a change of address during the enumeration phase, he says.Story continues below this adAccordingly, says Salgaoncar, on November 12, 2025, he contacted the BLO of their new ward, who instructed them to submit Form 8 for change of address. He says he and other family members filled the forms, and gave the same to the BLO, who told them that he had uploaded the forms on the ECI portal on December 8 and that their applications had been processed and forwarded.The ECI acknowledged receipt by an SMS, Salgaoncar says. But, when the draft electoral roll was published on December 16, he says, he and his family didn’t figure in it. When he enquired with both the BLOs, he says, he was told not to worry and that since their Form 8 applications had been acknowledged by the ECI through the online portal, the change would be incorporated in the final electoral roll.But, on January 21, after the expiry of the period for filing claims and objections, Salgaoncar says he received an automated notification stating that Form 8 applications had been rejected by the Electoral Registration Officer (ERO). He was also informed that the processing of forms had been stopped on October 27, 2025.“They said that since we had shifted residence, our EPIC stood deleted and that Form 8 applications could no longer be processed,” Salgaoncar says. “I was told the only remedy available was to submit Form 6… since there was no option in ERONET (the ECI software) for reviewing or restoring the deleted EPICs.”Story continues below this adIn February 2026, came the final electoral roll, and the names of him and his family were again missing.Salgaoncar decided to lodge a complaint on the National Grievance Service Portal of the ECI, along with a complaint to the office of the CEO, seeking clarification on the rejection of their Form 8s. He says he received similar responses. “They (officials) said the system is not retrieving the EPICs, since we were moved to the Absent, Shift, Duplicate, Dead (ASDD) voters’ list and deleted.”Adds Salgaoncar: “I don’t know what my fault is. Form 6 contains a declaration which states that it is solely applicable to first-time voters. I did not file Form 6 because it would have been a false declaration. It is against my ethics. You cannot punish a citizen due to a system constraint. Who gives them this right to delete… without any notice or a hearing? It is arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice.”WATCH | Sukhbir Sandhu, Vivek Joshi: Who are the ECs who objected to SIR?Story continues below this adSalgaoncar then lodged an appeal before the district election officer, North Goa, and another appeal before the CEO. One of the responses by the officials this time was that their Form 8s were rejected as the window for change of address was frozen during the enumeration phase.Salgaoncar asks why this was not communicated to the public. “If it was frozen, should it not get rejected at the inception stage only? What was the mechanism in place for people who shifted during the enumeration period? All I am saying is that, if there is a mistake in the system, you don’t ask me to file Form 6. You consider my Form 8. You are also restricting freedom of movement of people during enumeration.”Finally, in May, he filed a petition in the High Court. “They are asking me to file Form 6 as a new voter, which is not true. This will have a conflict later. If, for instance, the government… in the future… decides some citizenship issue or benefits of any scheme based on voting registration details, my previous voting history will go away,” Salgaoncar says. “I have that fear also.”