KOLKATA: Millions of people in India’s West Bengal state risk losing access to subsidised food and welfare benefits after a controversial revision of electoral rolls removed more than nine million names before the state elections.
The Special Intensive Revision, conducted by India’s Election Commission, was launched to identify deceased, duplicate or doubtful voters. However, rights advocates and political critics say the process disproportionately affected Muslims, particularly in districts where they form a significant share of the population.
The issue has gained urgency after the new Bharatiya Janata Party government in West Bengal announced that people excluded from the voter list would no longer be eligible for subsidised food rations and other welfare schemes.
According to an order issued by the state’s Food and Supplies Department on June 4, ration cards of those removed under the revision process are to be marked inactive as part of a verification drive linked to the Public Distribution System, which serves nearly 90 million people in the state.
The government later clarified that about 2.3 million people who challenged their removal before special tribunals would continue receiving benefits until their appeals are heard.
Families face uncertainty
For daily-wage worker Antu Sheikh, whose name was removed from the electoral rolls, the fear is no longer limited to losing his vote. He said he has been asked to submit more documents to continue receiving food benefits, but his work requires him to travel for railway construction projects.
“I can’t stay here indefinitely waiting for paperwork and hearings,” he said.
Sakeena Bano, a mother of three from South 24 Parganas district, said her appeal was rejected without a proper hearing. She fears losing both rations and cash assistance under a women’s welfare scheme.
Legal concerns
Legal experts say linking welfare benefits to voter status raises serious constitutional questions. Lawyer Sanjay Hegde said welfare benefits have no legal connection with electoral rolls and warned that governments could use such mechanisms to punish communities.
Welfare economist Jean Dreze called the revision process “clumsy, unreliable and authoritarian,” saying transferring voter-list exclusions to food distribution would deepen the damage.
Opposition leaders have also criticised the move as inhuman and legally questionable.
For those removed from the rolls, the fear is simple: losing the vote may now mean losing food, welfare and recognition by the state.
