KOLKATA: Not a single applicant who has approached the appellate tribunal against deletion of SIR names nor their lawyers have any clarity about the process to be followed to get back in the voter list.Alok Basu, a resident of Haridevpur, had gone to Dr Shyama Prasad Mukherjee National Institute of Water and Sanitation of Joka for two consecutive days – Sunday and Monday – with the hope that the tribunal would hear his case on the ground that his last name was wrongly recorded as ‘Bose’, leading to the name being deleted. But there is no information about the hearing yet.

“I have contacted my BLO, he doesn’t know. Neighbors – several people – whose names have been omitted, are in touch on whether we are being called for hearing. We don’t know whether we will be heard or whether our fate will be based on the same absurd logic that got us removed in the first place,” Basu said.“They could have had some website where the hearing dates could have been listed,” said Raghunath Chakraborty, a lawyer who provides legal advice extensively to the removed voters in Howrah. Advocates like Chakraborty and advocate Saikat Thakurata are helping people from weaker economic backgrounds file appeals and representing them pro bono.While 16 tribunals have started functioning from Monday, according to Chief Justice Sujoy Paul’s letter to the Supreme Court on Monday, the removed electors and their lawyers are confused about how they will be called for hearing and where they can see the orders passed by these tribunals.During the April 6 hearing in the SC, CJI Surya Kant, referring to CJ Paul’s letter, said that a retired Chief Justice had raised the issue regarding the process of providing ‘personal hearing’ to the affected party.Calcutta High Court lawyer Firdous Sameem said, “There is no clarity on how the applicant will be called. Will it be a personal hearing or will the tribunal only go through the documents already submitted. Interestingly, what documents will be given to the tribunal is also now known to the applicant.”He has the experience of appearing for two candidates fielded by Congress and Aam Janata Unnayan Party (AJUP) namely Motab Shaikh from Farakka and Kechabuddin Shaikh from Kaliganj respectively.In Motab’s case, Sameem physically appeared at Bichar Bhawan, where documents were provided and Motab’s name was later restored, allowing him to stand as a candidate. Citing the Supreme Court order of September 8, 2025, former judge TS Sivaganam said that Aadhaar card can be accepted as a supporting document. Although it is not proof of citizenship, it is “one of the documents enumerated for the purpose of establishing the identity of a person”.Meanwhile, in Kechabuddin’s case, Sameem is given a conference call link and presents his client’s case. Kechabuddin was also present during the hearing. Ultimately, his name was also directed to be included as it was found that it was clear from the documents given that he is a permanent resident of village Haat Gobindpur, Nadia. Sameem suggested that there could be an online platform where the orders are uploaded as the lawyer had also cited Motab’s case as a priority in the petition filed in the Supreme Court on Monday. Even though a three-member panel comprising former CJ TS Sivagnanam, Justice Pradipta Roy and Justice Pranab Kumar Deb was constituted by CJ Sujoy Paul following the April 7 SC order to prepare the SOP, the removed electors are confused about how they will be called for hearing. Now all they have is an ‘Appeal Number’ which was sent via SMS to their registered mobile.