Cabinet secretariat merely acknowledged complaint of Election Commissioners': RTI

NEW DELHI: After election commissioners S S Sandhu and Vivek Joshi wrote to cabinet secretary TV Somanathan in July objecting to the revised allocation of work among senior commission officers by senior deputy Election Commissioner (DEC) Maneesh Garg without EC approval, the secretariat merely sent them an acknowledgement with a copy to CEC Gyanesh Kumar for information, an RTI reply has revealed.The senior officers among whom the work was reallocated by Garg, who was only filling in for DEC (administration) Bhanu Prakash Yeturu while he was on leave, included Seema Khanna, who was brought in as head of the IT division of EC. Sandhu and Joshi, according to a report in Indian Express dated Sept 23, had in internal notes to DEC concerned, alleged that the ECINET software conceived and managed by the IT division, was too centralised, blocking access to field officers who were authorised by law to make changes to the electoral roll.Explaining the rationale behind the reluctance to take any action, a confidential note on the file shared by the Cabinet secretariat with transparency activist, Commodore Lokesh K Batra (Retd), as part of its 21-page RTI reply, stated that EC being a Constitutional body is insulated from the Executive's interference by design."The...communications are from the ECs in their individual capacity and, while they must be taken with due seriousness, they cannot be seen as a formal communication from the commission as a whole," it said adding that Garg is an officer of the EC and his work and conduct is to be regulated by rules and guidelines of EC.

"In the absence of any official communication from the commission as a whole, any action at this stage may be inappropriate.

It may also be construed as interference in the functioning of the constitutional body," the note underlines before announcing the decision to merely send an acknowledgement to the two ECs, with copies marked to the CEC and the DoPT.Commodore Batra had on September 24 sought copies of the Commissioners' communications, details of the steps taken by the Cabinet Secretariat and the relevant file notings.

This was a day after The Indian Express reported that two election commissioners had objected on record 14 times in 10 months to steps involving the addition of new voters and deletion of names from electoral rolls, and had approached the Cabinet Secretary over concerns about the integrity of the voter database.According to the documents shared as part of the RTI response, the two ECs Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, wrote separate but near-identical letters to Cabinet Secretary TV Somanathan on July 29, 2026, objecting to the conduct of a Garg and an order he issued revising the allocation of work among senior officers.

The two Commissioners alleged that the changes were made without prior discussion with the Commission or the officers concerned.A cabinet secretariat file noting dated Aug 3 says that both the ECs have stated that Garg, after assuming the charge as link officer of DEC (Administration), has issued an order regarding work allocation of equivalent and senior officers to him without discussing the revised work allocation with the Commission or the officers concerned.“Further, the ECs stated that this has happened despite repeated oral and written instructions to all concerned officers against taking such actions without prior discussion/approval of the Commission,” noting highlights.“In this connection, we may request the CEC for his opinion on the issue," it said.In another noting dated Aug 4, it is stated that the EC is a “Constitutional body and is insulated from executive interference by design to ensure that it functions independently and in a transparent manner.

The working and functioning of the Commission are governed by the rules and guidelines of the Election Commission.”It further states that since the communications are from the ECs in their individual capacity and, while they must be taken with due seriousness, they cannot be seen as a formal communication from the Commission as a whole.

The noting also stated that although Maneesh Garg had been appointed by the ACC, he was now an officer of the ECI and his work and conduct is to be regulated and monitored by the rules and guidelines of ECI.

It further stated that the ECs have sent these communications for appropriate action; however, in the absence of any official communication from the Commission as a whole, any action at this stage may be inappropriate.

It may also be construed as interference in the functioning of the Constitutional Body. "Hence, it would be appropriate to send acknowledgement to both Election Commissioners with a copy to PPS to CEC for information of CEC," it stated.A copy was also marked to be sent to the secretary, department of personnel and training since Garg was an All-India Service officer.