A notice issued to globally acclaimed Nobel Prize–winning economist Amartya Sen during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls has sparked a political row, even as officials clarified that the move was routine and system-generated.
According to Election Commission sources, the notice was automatically triggered by the SIR software due to two data inconsistencies in the enumeration form. These included a spelling discrepancy in Amartya Sen’s name and a “logical discrepancy” relating to the recorded age difference between Sen and his mother being less than 15 years. Officials stressed that such alerts are generated mechanically whenever anomalies are detected and do not involve manual selection or subjective judgment.
Despite these clarifications, the development led to sharp political reactions. Abhishek Banerjee alleged that issuing notices to eminent personalities amounted to an “insult to the people of Bengal,” questioning the manner in which the revision exercise was being carried out.
The Election Commission of India rejected the charge, stating that the SIR process is uniform and technology-driven, with similar notices issued across the country wherever spelling errors, age mismatches or other inconsistencies are found. The Bharatiya Janata Party also dismissed allegations of bias, describing the controversy as a mischaracterisation of a standard administrative procedure.
The episode has added to the political heat surrounding voter list revisions, underscoring how routine data-verification exercises can quickly escalate into broader debates over intent, perception and institutional credibility during sensitive electoral processes.
