The EduLaw Daily Docket, Tuesday, June 2, 2026, The Franchise Issue
EduLaw EditorialDaily NewsletterThe EduLaw, Daily Legal & Civic Intelligence The Daily Docket Tuesday, June 2, 2026, Vol. I, Issue 031, THE FRANCHISE ISSUE , Law, Geopolitics, Markets, Polity SC Roundup 25 HC Pulse Tribunal Wire Listed Wednesday Statute Watch Bare Act Topic of the Day Quiz Flashcards Lead, The Day In One Sentence The Supreme Court's reasoned endorsement of the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls , delivered by the Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, anchored a polity-heavy Tuesday, even as the Court separately clarified that limitation under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act runs from the disposal of a Section 33 application, five new judges took the apex court's working strength to 37, the India Oman CEPA entered into force, the Sensex rallied 382 points to 74,649.84, and PM Modi hosted Myanmar's President at Hyderabad House. Tuesday, June 2 was a franchise Tuesday. The right to vote, the integrity of the roll, and the boundary between electoral eligibility and citizenship sat at the centre of the legal day. Around it: an arbitration limitation clarification, a freshly strengthened apex bench, a new free trade pact, and a delicate North-East and West Asia backdrop. The connecting thread is the architecture of democratic and economic participation. 324 SIR Anchor Article ECI superintendence upheld 37 SC Working Strength 5 new judges, of 38 sanctioned +382 Sensex Close (pts) 74,649.84, +0.52% +101 Nifty Close (pts) 23,483.55, +0.43% 98%+ India Oman CEPA Duty-free tariff lines, live Jun 1 ~$96 Brent Crude Hormuz risk premium persists Today's Reading Plan Pick Your Lane, 25 Minutes Total Lead Story, SIR Verdict 11 min Topic of the Day 8 min HC Pulse Scan 5 min Quiz and Flashcards 3 min The 90 Second Brief Lead, Polity The Supreme Court has upheld the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls. The Bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi held the exercise is within the ECI's mandate under Article 324 and the Representation of the People Act, and advances free and fair elections. SC, Arbitration In NHAI v. T. Younis (2026 INSC 616), the Court reiterated on June 2 that the limitation under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act runs from the date the Section 33 request is disposed of, whether the Section 33 plea is allowed or dismissed. SC, Composition Five new judges, appointed June 1, take the apex court's working strength to 37 , one short of the sanctioned 38. The five: Justices Sheel Nagu, Shree Chandrashekhar, Sanjeev Sachdeva, Arun Palli, and Sr. Adv. V. Mohana . Trade, CEPA The India Oman Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement entered into force on June 1, granting duty-free access to over 98% of Oman's tariff lines, covering more than 99% of India's exports by value. A boost for textiles, pharma, and MSMEs. Markets After a volatile session, the Sensex rallied 382.50 points to 74,649.84 (+0.52%) and the Nifty 50 rose 100.95 points to 23,483.55 (+0.43%), led by IT stocks. The rebound came ahead of the RBI MPC outcome later in the week. India, Diplomacy PM Modi hosted Myanmar President Min Aung Hlaing at Hyderabad House. The Myanmar side assured that its territory would not be used by anti-India elements; talks touched on junta-Opposition dialogue and Aung San Suu Kyi's detention. Manipur, Federalism The standoff over 14 Kuki detainees deepened, with Naga groups opposing their release and the United Naga Council threatening a highway shutdown. The Khemchand Singh government faces a renewed law-and-order test in the hill districts. West Asia, Oil Iran suspended message exchanges with the U.S. over Israel's escalating strikes in Lebanon; Trump said Israel and Hezbollah agreed to halt attacks. Brent rose to about $96 per barrel , sustaining the Strait of Hormuz risk premium. Education, NTA The United Doctors Front was barred from deposing before the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Education on NEET after BJP MPs' objections; CBSE's much-delayed Class 12 re-evaluation portal remained inactive past its launch date. Editor's Note Tuesday's legal day belonged to the franchise. The Supreme Court's endorsement of the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls, pronounced by the Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, is the most consequential constitutional pronouncement of the season. The Court held that the SIR falls squarely within the ECI's superintendence under Article 324 and its roll-revision power under the Representation of the People Act, that adopting a procedure different from a routine summary revision does not by itself make the exercise unconstitutional, and that the measures are not manifestly excessive or disproportionate. Crucially, the Court drew a line between electoral eligibility and citizenship: inclusion in the roll carries a presumption of validity that can be rebutted, while exclusion from the roll is not, by itself, a determination on citizenship. For aspirants and practitioners, the case anchors a cluster of testable propositions on Articles 324 and 326, Sections 16 and 21 of the RPA, 1950, and the proportionality standard. The Court was busy on a second front. In National Highway Authority of India v. T. Younis (Neutral Citation 2026 INSC 616), a Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe clarified a recurring arbitration-limitation question: where a party has invoked Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for correction, interpretation, or an additional award), the three-month limitation to challenge the award under Section 34 runs from the date the Section 33 request is disposed of, and this holds whether the Section 33 application is ultimately allowed or dismissed. The ruling restores certainty for parties who would otherwise file Section 34 petitions out of an abundance of caution while Section 33 proceedings remain pending. The institutional backdrop is the apex court's growing bench. On June 1, the President appointed five judges, taking the working strength to 37, just short of the sanctioned 38 fixed by the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026. On the economic side, the India Oman Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement entered into force on June 1, opening near-total duty-free access for Indian goods in Oman. This issue carries every recurring feature, the 25 HC Pulse, the Tribunal Wire, the Statute Watch, the Bare Act of the Day on Article 324, the Topic of the Day on the franchise and roll revision, the How To Answer model, the Practising Lawyer's Corner, and the full interactive layer. Lead, Constitutional Law and Election Law ⏱ 11 min read The Roll And The Republic, How The Supreme Court Upheld The Special Intensive Revision ADR v. ECI, W.P. (C) 640/2025 Coram: CJI Surya Kant, J. Joymalya Bagchi Status: SIR upheld; unanimous Provisions: Article 324, Article 326, RPA 1950 ss. 16, 21 30 Second Read The Holding: The Supreme Court upheld the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls. Adopting a procedure different from a routine summary revision does not make the exercise unconstitutional; the measures are not manifestly excessive or disproportionate. The Power: The SIR is traceable to Article 324 (superintendence, direction and control of elections) read with Section 21 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 (power to prepare and revise rolls). Eligibility flows from Article 326 and Section 16. The Citizenship Line: Inclusion in the roll carries a presumption of validity that can be rebutted; exclusion from the roll is not, by itself, a determination of loss of citizenship. The ECI may examine citizenship only for the limited purpose of electoral eligibility. The Coram: Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi ; the verdict was unanimous and follows interim directions (Aug 2025) on disclosure of deleted voters and acceptance of Aadhaar/EPIC for inclusion claims. PYQ Connector, UPSC Mains 2017 GS II on the role and powers of the Election Commission; CLAT 2021 on Article 324; Delhi Judicial Services on adult suffrage under Article 326; UPSC Prelims 2017 on the constitutional status of the ECI; West Bengal Judicial Services on the Representation of the People Acts of 1950 and 1951. The Election Commission of India announced the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls on June 24, 2025, the first intensive revision of those rolls since 2003, ahead of the State Assembly election. Unlike a routine summary revision, an intensive revision proceeds through house-to-house verification by Booth Level Officers, distribution and collection of pre-filled enumeration forms, and supporting documentation. The Association for Democratic Reforms, joined by activist Yogendra Yadav and several Opposition figures, moved the Court under Article 32, contending that the SIR was arbitrary, shifted the burden of proof of eligibility onto individual citizens, excluded commonly held documents such as Aadhaar and ration cards from the initial document list, and risked mass exclusion in a State with high migration and poverty. Through the litigation, the Bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued a series of interim directions. In August 2025, the Court directed the ECI to publish a district-wise, booth-level searchable list of over 65 lakh electors deleted from the draft roll along with the reasons for each deletion, and to accept Aadhaar and EPIC in support of objections and inclusion claims. The Court reserved judgment after extensive arguments and, on May 27, 2026, unanimously upheld the SIR. The reasoned conclusions, elaborated as the Court's pronouncements were taken up this week, settle the constitutional questions at the heart of the dispute. Three doctrinal points emerge. First , on power: the SIR is within the ECI's plenary superintendence under Article 324 and its statutory roll-revision power under Section 21 of the RPA, 1950; the adoption of an intensive (rather than summary) method does not, by itself, offend the Constitution. Second , on proportionality: the measures adopted, document verification, enumeration forms, and a defined timeline, are not manifestly excessive or disproportionate, and the SIR secures rather than subverts the mandate of free and fair elections. Third , on the eligibility-citizenship boundary: while inclusion in the roll attracts a presumption of validity that can be rebutted on objection, exclusion from the roll is not a freestanding adjudication of citizenship; the ECI's inquiry into citizenship is confined to the limited purpose of determining electoral eligibility. Adopting a different procedure from routine electoral roll revisions does not render the exercise unconstitutional; the measures adopted in the SIR are not manifestly excessive or disproportionate, and the exercise secures the mandate of free and fair elections. Substance of the holding, ADR v. ECI, Bench of CJI Surya Kant and J. Joymalya Bagchi (as reported by SC Observer, The Hindu, LiveLaw, The Wire) The practical consequences are significant. For the ECI, the judgment validates the SIR methodology while keeping the interim safeguards, disclosure of deletions with reasons and acceptance of Aadhaar/EPIC for inclusion claims, as the operative procedural floor. For voters, the presumption-of-validity framework means inclusion is the default, and removal must be justified and is open to objection through the claims-and-objections process. For the political contest, the verdict removes a cloud over roll-revision exercises being rolled out beyond Bihar, including the parallel challenge to the SIR in West Bengal. The deeper systemic question, whether intensive revision can be conducted at scale without disenfranchising the poor and the migrant, now turns on implementation fidelity rather than constitutional permission. The Constitutional Scales, SIR Challenge Petitioners (ADR) v. Election Commission of India Petitioners' Case SIR is arbitrary; shifts burden of proving eligibility onto citizens; excludes commonly held documents; risks mass exclusion in a high-migration, high-poverty State; short timeline and absence of consultation undermine universal adult suffrage under Article 326. ⚖ ECI's Case SIR is traceable to Article 324 and Section 21, RPA 1950; necessitated by urbanisation, migration, and rolls not intensively revised since 2003; serves roll integrity and free and fair elections. Interim safeguards (deletion disclosure, Aadhaar/EPIC) address fairness. Outcome: The Court upheld the SIR unanimously. Procedure may differ from a summary revision without being unconstitutional; measures are not manifestly excessive or disproportionate. Inclusion carries a rebuttable presumption of validity; exclusion is not a determination of citizenship. The August 2025 interim safeguards remain the procedural floor. Probability Meter UPSC Pre 90% UPSC Mains 92% CLAT 88% Judiciary 93% Interview 95% Prelims Trap Card Trap MCQ: "Inclusion of a person's name in the electoral roll is conclusive proof of Indian citizenship." This is FALSE . The Court has clarified that enrolment in the voter list does not confer citizenship; inclusion carries only a rebuttable presumption of validity, and the ECI examines citizenship purely for electoral eligibility. Lock in: ECI's power to revise rolls flows from Article 324 + Section 21, RPA 1950. Eligibility to vote flows from Article 326 (adult suffrage) + Section 16, RPA 1950 (disqualifications). Citizenship determination proper lies under the Citizenship Act, 1955, not the electoral roll. 2003 Last Intensive Revision Of Bihar rolls before SIR 65L+ Deletions Disclosed Per Aug 2025 interim order 324 Anchor Article ECI superintendence of elections SIR Litigation, From Notification To Judgment The journey of the Bihar Special Intensive Revision through the Supreme Court. 24 June 2025 ECI notifies the SIR of Bihar's rolls First intensive revision since 2003, ahead of the Assembly election; house-to-house verification and enumeration forms. July 2025 ADR & Ors move the Supreme Court under Article 32 Challenge to legality and procedure; prayer for stay. Court agrees to hear; urges ECI to consider Aadhaar, ration card and EPIC. 14 Aug 2025 Interim order on deleted voters Court directs ECI to publish a searchable, booth-level list of over 65 lakh deleted electors with reasons, and to accept Aadhaar/EPIC for objections. 4 Feb 2026 Notice in Mamata Banerjee's West Bengal SIR plea SIR had begun in West Bengal on 4 November 2025; a parallel challenge is taken on board. 29 Jan 2026 Judgment reserved The Court reserves verdict in the Bihar SIR matter after extended arguments. 27 May to 2 June 2026 SIR upheld ; reasoned conclusions elaborated Unanimous Bench (CJI Surya Kant, J. Bagchi) holds the SIR valid under Article 324 and the RPA; clarifies the eligibility-citizenship boundary. Continuing coverage this week. Three Reader Lenses ★ Lawyer's Brief Election-law petitions challenging roll revisions now face a settled framework: the burden is on the challenger to show the exercise is manifestly excessive or disproportionate. Frame relief around procedural fairness, deletion disclosure and acceptance of identity documents, rather than the existence of the power itself. ¶ UPSC and Judiciary Capsule Build the chain: Article 324 (ECI superintendence), Article 326 (adult suffrage), RPA 1950 ss. 16 and 21 (disqualifications and roll revision), and the eligibility-citizenship distinction. Pair with the constitutional status and independence of the ECI for a full polity answer. ♣ Citizen's Lens Inclusion in the roll is the default and presumed valid; if your name is omitted, that is not a verdict on your citizenship and is open to objection with documents including Aadhaar and EPIC. The judgment protects roll integrity while keeping inclusion safeguards in place. Counsel Scorecard, Today's Appearances Who Argued What, And How It Landed For the ECI Election Commission Defended the SIR as an exercise within Article 324 and Section 21, RPA 1950, necessitated by migration and rolls not intensively revised since 2003; the exercise serves roll integrity and free and fair elections. Upheld For ADR & Petitioners Article 32 petitioners Argued the SIR was arbitrary, shifted the burden onto citizens, and risked mass exclusion; secured interim safeguards on deletion disclosure and Aadhaar/EPIC acceptance. Safeguards Retained For NHAI Arbitration, S. 34 In NHAI v. T. Younis , contended that the Section 34 limitation should run from disposal of the Section 33 application; the Court agreed and restored the condonation of delay. Allowed For T. Younis & Anr. Respondent, land award Objected that the Section 34 application was beyond the condonable 120-day limit; the High Court had agreed but the Supreme Court reversed. Reversed For CBI Jhunjhunwala matter Secured permission from a Mumbai court (June 1) to arrest former Reliance ADAG executive Amitabh Jhunjhunwala in an alleged bank-loan-misuse case; ED probe runs parallel. Arrest Allowed For UDF (Doctors) Parliamentary panel, NEET United Doctors Front sought to depose before the Standing Committee on Education on NEET/NTA; was barred after BJP MPs' objections. Barred 3 Sentence Revision Note What happened: The Supreme Court (CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi) unanimously upheld the ECI's Special Intensive Revision of Bihar's electoral rolls, holding that an intensive procedure is not unconstitutional and that the measures are not manifestly excessive or disproportionate. The principle: Roll revision flows from Article 324 read with Section 21, RPA 1950; eligibility from Article 326 and Section 16; inclusion carries a rebuttable presumption of validity while exclusion is not a determination of citizenship. For your citation file: Anchor case Association for Democratic Reforms v. Election Commission of India , W.P. (C) 640/2025; read with the August 2025 interim directions on disclosure of 65 lakh deletions and acceptance of Aadhaar/EPIC. Self Check Quiz, 3 Questions Did You Read the Lead Carefully? Q1. Which constitutional provision principally vests the Election Commission with the superintendence, direction and control of elections, relied on to uphold the SIR? A Article 326 B Article 324 C Article 329 D Article 243K Answer: B. Article 324 vests superintendence, direction and control of elections in the ECI. Article 326 concerns adult suffrage; Article 329 bars interference in electoral matters; Article 243K is the State Election Commission for panchayats. Q2. According to the Court, what is the effect of exclusion of a person's name from the electoral roll? A Automatic loss of citizenship B Not a determination of citizenship C Permanent and non-appealable D Conclusive proof of ineligibility Answer: B. Exclusion from the roll is not, by itself, a determination of loss of citizenship; the ECI examines citizenship only for the limited purpose of electoral eligibility, and omissions can be challenged through claims and objections. Q3. In NHAI v. T. Younis (2026 INSC 616), from when does limitation under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration Act run when a Section 33 request has been made? A From the date of the original award B From the date Section 33 is filed C From disposal of the Section 33 request D Only if Section 33 is allowed Answer: C. Limitation runs from the date the Section 33 request is disposed of by the Arbitral Tribunal, irrespective of whether the Section 33 application is allowed or dismissed. Topic of the Day, Beyond the News The Franchise, The Roll, And The Republic, What Intensive Revision Means For Adult Suffrage, Federalism, And The Independence Of The Election Commission A close to 1,500 word deep dive into the constitutional architecture of the right to vote, the statutory machinery of electoral rolls, and what the Court's endorsement of the SIR settles, and what it leaves open. The right to vote in India sits at an unusual constitutional location. It is not a fundamental right in the strict sense; the Supreme Court has long characterised it as a statutory right flowing from the Representation of the People Acts, even as Article 326 enshrines the principle of universal adult suffrage. The franchise is therefore the meeting point of a constitutional value (adult suffrage), a constitutional institution (the Election Commission under Article 324), and a statutory machinery (the rolls prepared and revised under the RPA, 1950). The Special Intensive Revision controversy forced the Court to map the relationship between these three layers, and the resulting judgment is best read as a definition of the boundaries of each. 1 Franchise Universal adult suffrage under Article 326; the right to vote as a statutory right operationalised through the rolls. 2 Roll Preparation and revision of electoral rolls under Section 21, RPA 1950; summary versus intensive revision. 3 Commission The ECI's plenary superintendence under Article 324 and its independence as a constitutional body. The constitutional status of the Election Commission is the first pillar. Article 324 vests in the ECI the superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of electoral rolls and the conduct of all elections to Parliament and the State Legislatures. The Court in Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner (1978) read Article 324 as a reservoir of power to act in unforeseen situations, subject to the rule of law and to existing statutes. The SIR judgment is squarely in this tradition: the power to conduct an intensive revision exists within Article 324 and the RPA, and the only live question is whether the manner of its exercise is fair and proportionate. The Court answered that the intensive method, though more demanding than a summary revision, is not constitutionally suspect merely because it is more rigorous. The second pillar is the statutory machinery. Section 21 of the RPA, 1950, empowers the ECI to prepare and revise rolls, and contemplates both routine and special revisions. Section 16 lists the disqualifications, principally, not being a citizen of India, being of unsound mind, and disqualification under any law relating to corrupt practices. The SIR's logic is that a roll which has not undergone intensive revision for over two decades will accumulate dead, shifted and duplicate entries, and that an enumeration exercise is the statutorily contemplated cure. The petitioners' counter, that the exercise inverts the burden of proof and risks excluding the genuinely eligible, is not a challenge to the power but to its design, and it was this design that the August 2025 interim safeguards were meant to correct. The third pillar, and the most doctrinally important, is the boundary between electoral eligibility and citizenship. The Court was careful to hold that the ECI's inquiry into citizenship, which is one of the Section 16 disqualifications, is confined to the limited purpose of deciding whether a person may be on the roll. It is not, and cannot become, a parallel mechanism for adjudicating citizenship status, which is governed by the Citizenship Act, 1955, and its own machinery. This distinction matters enormously in the present political climate, where roll revision and citizenship determination are frequently conflated. By holding that inclusion is presumptively valid (though rebuttable) and that exclusion is not a finding on citizenship, the Court insulated the franchise question from the citizenship question while preserving the ECI's ability to keep non-citizens off the roll. The federalism dimension is subtle but real. Electoral rolls are prepared for both parliamentary and assembly constituencies, and the timing of an intensive revision in a poll-bound State inevitably acquires partisan colour. The Opposition's apprehension, that an intensive revision close to an election advantages the incumbent by reshaping the electorate, is a political argument that the Court could address only through the lens of fairness and proportionality, not by second-guessing the ECI's timing. The parallel West Bengal challenge, where SIR began in November 2025, illustrates that the exercise is being rolled out across States with different governing parties, which itself blunts the claim of targeted design. The systemic safeguard is transparency: the disclosure of deletions with reasons, and the acceptance of widely held documents for inclusion claims. The implementation question is where the real stakes now lie. A judgment upholding the power does not guarantee a fair exercise on the ground. The training and adequacy of Booth Level Officers, the realism of timelines during monsoon and migration seasons, the genuine accessibility of the enumeration process for those without the listed documents, and the responsiveness of the claims-and-objections machinery will determine whether the SIR purifies the roll or prunes it. The Court's framework places the legal burden on challengers to demonstrate that a particular exercise is manifestly excessive or disproportionate, which means future litigation will be fact-intensive and State-specific rather than a frontal attack on the concept. The aspirant's answer that scores highly does three things. First, it locates the franchise within the three-layer architecture: Article 326 (value), Article 324 (institution), RPA 1950 (machinery). Second, it states the holding precisely: intensive revision is not per se unconstitutional; proportionality is the test; eligibility and citizenship are distinct. Third, it offers a balanced opinion: the judgment correctly protects both roll integrity and the franchise, but the durable answer lies in implementation safeguards, transparency of deletions, generous document acceptance, and realistic timelines, so that the purification of the roll does not become the disenfranchisement of the vulnerable. Reader Poll, Yesterday's Results Does the Supreme Court's endorsement of intensive roll revision strike the right balance between roll integrity and the franchise? Yes, with the interim safeguards intact 41% No, implementation risks disenfranchisement 39% Only if deletions are fully transparent 16% No view 4% Indicative reader sample. Tomorrow's poll on the RBI MPC outcome appears below the Glossary. Bare Act of the Day, Annotated Article 324 of the Constitution of India The constitutional source of the Election Commission's authority, on which the SIR judgment rests. 324. Superintendence, direction and control of elections to be vested in an Election Commission. (1) The superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of the electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections to Parliament and to the Legislature of every State and of elections to the offices of President and Vice-President held under this Constitution shall be vested in a Commission (referred to in this Constitution as the Election Commission). (2) The Election Commission shall consist of the Chief Election Commissioner and such number of other Election Commissioners, if any, as the President may from time to time fix. [Note: Article 324 is read with Articles 325, 326, 327 and 328, and with the Representation of the People Acts of 1950 (rolls, qualifications) and 1951 (conduct of elections). The independence of the ECI is reinforced by the security of tenure of the Chief Election Commissioner under Article 324(5).] The Superintendence Power Article 324(1) is the reservoir of plenary power read in Mohinder Singh Gill (1978). It covers preparation of rolls and conduct of elections, and is the source on which the SIR exercise was sustained, subject to the rule of law and existing statutes. The Companion Provisions Article 325 bars exclusion from rolls on grounds of religion, race, caste or sex; Article 326 enshrines universal adult suffrage; Articles 327 and 328 empower Parliament and State legislatures to make election laws. The Statutory Layer RPA 1950: rolls, qualifications, Section 16 (disqualifications), Section 21 (revision) RPA 1951: conduct of elections, corrupt practices, disputes Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 Independence Of The ECI Article 324(5): CEC's removal akin to a Supreme Court judge Anoop Baranwal (2023): interim appointments framework CEC and EC Appointments Act, 2023 Today's Connection The SIR was upheld as an exercise traceable to Article 324 and Section 21, RPA 1950. The Court emphasised proportionality and the eligibility-citizenship boundary, not the absence of power. Drafting Tip for Aspirants Always separate the source of power (Article 324 + RPA) from the standard of review (proportionality, manifest excess). Then add the eligibility-citizenship distinction. This three-step structure earns full marks. PYQ Connector, UPSC Mains 2022 GS II on the institutional mechanisms for free and fair elections; CLAT on Article 324 and the ECI's powers; Delhi Judicial Services on universal adult suffrage; UPSC Prelims on the constitutional bodies and their composition. Hover to Flip Flashcards Hover or tap each card to reveal the answer. Built for one week retention of today's content. Flashcard 1 Which Bench upheld the ECI's Special Intensive Revision of Bihar's electoral rolls? Hover to flip Answer The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi , in ADR v. ECI , W.P. (C) 640/2025. The verdict was unanimous. Flashcard 2 Does inclusion in the electoral roll confer citizenship? Hover to flip Answer No. Inclusion carries only a rebuttable presumption of validity ; the ECI examines citizenship purely for electoral eligibility. Exclusion is not a determination of loss of citizenship. Flashcard 3 In NHAI v. T. Younis (2026 INSC 616), from when does the Section 34(3) limitation run? Hover to flip Answer From the date the Section 33 request is disposed of by the Arbitral Tribunal, whether the Section 33 plea is allowed or dismissed. Bench: Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe. Flashcard 4 How many new judges were appointed to the Supreme Court on June 1, 2026, and what is the new working strength? Hover to flip Answer Five new judges; working strength now 37 , one short of the sanctioned 38. Justices Sheel Nagu, Shree Chandrashekhar, Sanjeev Sachdeva, Arun Palli, and Sr. Adv. V. Mohana. Flashcard 5 When did the India Oman CEPA enter into force and what access does it grant? Hover to flip Answer Effective June 1, 2026 . Duty-free access to over 98% of Oman's tariff lines, covering more than 99% of India's exports by value. Boost for textiles, pharma, MSMEs. Flashcard 6 Which Article enshrines universal adult suffrage as the basis of elections in India? Hover to flip Answer Article 326 . Every person above 18 who is a citizen and not otherwise disqualified is entitled to be registered as a voter. Disqualifications appear in Section 16, RPA 1950. 25 HC Pulse, Daily Recurring ⏱ 5 min scan The 25 HC Pulse, Every Major High Court, June 2, 2026 The Tuesday working day produced a moderate spread of reportable activity, with the Allahabad HC publishing its routine defective and clear criminal cause lists, the Delhi HC continuing its weekly round of pronouncements, and the Gauhati and Manipur HCs tracking the Kuki-detainee standoff and associated bandh calls in the hill districts. All India HC Pulse Date: June 2, 2026 , Source: LiveLaw, Bar and Bench, HC websites High Court Matter Key Order or Observation Tag Allahabad Cause-list administration The Court published its lists of criminal cases reported defective and clear as on 02-06-2026, with revised arrangement-of-Benches notices; routine docket alongside continuing scrutiny of conversion-law FIR misuse. Criminal Delhi Weekly pronouncements Continuing its weekly round of pronouncements (Round-Up May 25 to 31 published); routine commercial, writ and arbitration matters listed on June 2. Commercial Bombay Routine writ and CBI follow-up Administrative continuity after the Jhunjhunwala arrest order by the Mumbai special CBI court (June 1); routine writ disposals on June 2. Writ Calcutta SIR West Bengal watch HC observers tracking the implications of the Supreme Court's SIR endorsement for the parallel West Bengal revision; no fresh reportable headline on June 2. PIL Madras Routine docket Administrative continuity under the new TVK-led State government; CM C. Joseph Vijay's June 1 governance statement noted; no fresh reportable HC headline. Writ Gujarat Routine docket No major reportable headline order on June 2. Civil Karnataka Arbitration follow-up Registry noting the Supreme Court's reversal in NHAI v. T. Younis , which had set aside a Karnataka HC view on Section 34(3) limitation; remand for merits. Arbitration Kerala Routine docket No major reportable headline order on June 2. Civil Punjab and Haryana Post-elevation transition Administrative transition following the elevation of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu to the Supreme Court (June 1); routine docket otherwise. Civil Telangana Routine service docket No major reportable headline order on June 2. Service Rajasthan Routine civil docket No major reportable headline order on June 2. Civil Madhya Pradesh Post-elevation transition Transition following the elevation of Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva to the Supreme Court (June 1); routine bail and criminal docket. Criminal Patna SIR implementation watch Routine criminal docket; HC observers tracking the operational fallout of the SIR endorsement for Bihar's rolls. Criminal Jharkhand Routine civil and criminal No major reportable headline order on June 2. Civil Chhattisgarh Routine docket No major reportable headline order on June 2. Civil Orissa Routine docket No major reportable headline order on June 2. Civil Gauhati NE region docket, Manipur watch Routine docket; observers tracking the 14 Kuki-detainee standoff, Naga opposition, and the UNC highway-shutdown threat in the hill districts. Civil Andhra Pradesh Routine writ docket No major reportable headline order on June 2. Writ Sikkim Routine docket No major reportable headline order on June 2. Civil Manipur Law-and-order watch HC monitoring the detainee-release standoff and bandh calls in Churachandpur and Kangpokpi; no formal listing arising from the protests. Civil Meghalaya Routine docket No major reportable headline order on June 2. Civil Tripura Routine docket No major reportable headline order on June 2. Civil Uttarakhand Routine docket No major reportable headline order on June 2. Civil Himachal Pradesh Routine docket No major reportable headline order on June 2. Civil J and K and Ladakh Post-elevation transition Administrative transition following the elevation of Chief Justice Arun Palli to the Supreme Court (June 1); routine service docket. Service Docket Heatmap, Where the Pressure Is Today State by state visualisation of reportable headline activity on June 2, 2026. A moderate working Tuesday, with several HCs in post-elevation transition. Uttar Pradesh 1 Cause-list admin Delhi 1 Weekly pronouncements Karnataka 1 Arbitration follow-up Maharashtra 1 CBI follow-up West Bengal 0 SIR watch Tamil Nadu 0 Routine Kerala 0 Routine Gujarat 0 Routine Manipur 0 L&O watch Telangana 0 Routine Rajasthan 0 Routine Madhya Pradesh 0 Transition 2 or more reportable items 1 reportable item No reportable headline Tribunal Wire, Daily Recurring ⏱ 4 min scan Tribunal Wire, NCLAT, ITAT, SEBI, NGT and CCI Quasi Judicial Daily Wire Date: June 2, 2026, Source: Tribunal websites, LiveLaw Biz, regulator portals Forum Matter Order or Development Why It Matters NCLAT IBC daily docket Principal and Chennai Benches worked through their daily order lists on June 2; routine IBC appeals and interim applications across the docket. Practitioner impact, scheduling. NCLAT (II) IBC v. SEBI interplay Continuing application of the principle that Section 14 IBC moratorium prevails over Section 28A SEBI recovery, as recently affirmed in appellate orders. Cross-statute priority for IRPs. SEBI Market regulation continuity Routine regulatory administration; ongoing consultation processes on market-structure reforms remain open for industry comment this week. Significant for exchanges, intermediaries. NCLT Routine CIRP admissions Multiple bench-level disposals on June 2; no major cross-bench reportable headline order. Routine. ITAT Routine tax appeals Standard appeal docket on June 2; benches continuing to apply settled buyback and capital-gains positions in pending matters. Tax practitioners track spillover. NGT State compliance docket Routine state-level pollution and project-compliance matters; no major reportable headline on June 2. Routine. CCI SEP FRAND continuing Standard-essential-patent and dominance-abuse jurisprudence remains layered through pending appellate analysis; no fresh headline on June 2. Competition-IP boundary live. CESTAT Routine GST and customs appeals Standard appeal docket on June 2; no major reportable headline. Routine. AFT Routine docket No major reportable headline on June 2. Routine. Listed Wednesday, June 3, 2026 What is in the Court Calendars and the Policy Diary, And Why It Matters RBI Monetary Policy Committee meeting begins. The June MPC convenes June 3 to 5, with the decision on June 5. Consensus expects the repo rate held at 5.25% with a neutral stance, amid the Hormuz oil-price risk. Watch: Any change in the inflation guidance. SC Post-SIR follow-on listings. Implications of the SIR endorsement for the parallel West Bengal challenge and for compliance with the deletion-disclosure safeguards are expected to feature. Watch: Whether any State-specific directions follow. SC Constitution Bench matters. Continued listings of pending references; the freshly strengthened bench (37 working judges) allows additional Bench formation in the coming weeks. Watch: Roster reconstitution by the CJI. Mumbai (CBI) Jhunjhunwala custody proceedings. Following the June 1 arrest order, custody and remand proceedings in the alleged bank-loan-misuse case are expected to continue. Parliamentary Panel NEET and NTA deliberations. The Standing Committee on Education's examination of NEET-UG and the NTA, including pen-and-paper versus computer-based testing, continues after the UDF was barred from deposing. MEA BSF-BGB DG-level talks. The first biannual round of India-Bangladesh border-force Director-General talks is slated for Delhi from June 8 to 11; preparatory engagement this week. Today's SC and Significant Court Rulings, Expandable Deep Dive Click each ruling to read the full analysis. All four matters were significant on or around June 2, 2026. Election Law Ruling 1, Supreme Court Upholds the Special Intensive Revision The Bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi unanimously upheld the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls in Association for Democratic Reforms v. Election Commission of India , W.P. (C) 640/2025. The Court held that adopting a procedure different from a routine summary revision does not render the exercise unconstitutional, that the measures are not manifestly excessive or disproportionate, and that the SIR secures the mandate of free and fair elections. The power is traceable to Article 324 and Section 21 of the RPA, 1950; eligibility flows from Article 326 and Section 16. Inclusion in the roll carries a rebuttable presumption of validity, while exclusion is not a determination of citizenship; the ECI's citizenship inquiry is limited to electoral eligibility. The August 2025 interim safeguards (disclosure of 65 lakh deletions with reasons; acceptance of Aadhaar and EPIC for inclusion claims) remain the procedural floor. ADR v. ECI, W.P. (C) 640/2025; CJI Surya Kant & J. Joymalya Bagchi Arbitration Ruling 2, Section 34(3) Limitation Runs From Disposal of Section 33 Request In National Highway Authority of Indi