Cabinet Secretariat Explains Its Decision
The Cabinet Secretariat declined to act on separate complaints submitted by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi against Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg. The Secretariat said the letters represented the commissioners individually and could not be treated as an official communication from the Election Commission as a whole. Acting without such a communication, it explained, could be viewed as executive interference in the functioning of an independent constitutional body.
The documents were disclosed in response to an RTI application filed by retired Commodore Lokesh K Batra. Although the Secretariat considered the concerns serious, it recommended acknowledging the letters and keeping the matter on record for future decisions concerning the officer.
EC Complaints Questioned Work Allocation
Sandhu and Joshi wrote separately to Cabinet Secretary TV Somanathan on July 29, questioning changes Garg allegedly made to the allocation of responsibilities among senior Election Commission officials. According to the documents cited by PTI, the commissioners alleged that Garg issued the redistribution order while serving as link officer for the Deputy Election Commissioner responsible for administration. They said the changes were made without consulting the Commission or the officials concerned.
The letters also alleged that the order disregarded earlier oral and written instructions requiring prior discussion or approval. Joshi further alleged that the Administration Division did not provide the relevant file when he requested it. These remain allegations outlined in the commissioners’ communications. The Secretariat’s decision did not establish whether Garg had committed any wrongdoing.
Election Commission Independence Cited
The Cabinet Secretariat emphasised that the Election Commission operates independently under its own rules and guidelines. Its note referred to Section 18 of the 2023 law governing the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners, which provides for unanimous decisions wherever possible and majority decisions when opinions differ.
Although Garg’s appointment to the Commission was approved by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet on September 2, 2024, the Secretariat said his work and conduct were subject to the Commission’s rules. The Secretariat acknowledged the letters on August 5 and forwarded copies to the Department of Personnel and Training, the Establishment Officer and the Chief Election Commissioner’s office.
EC Says Redistribution Orders Were Not Implemented
In a statement issued on September 26, the Election Commission said Garg’s work redistribution orders had not been implemented following directions from the two commissioners. The Commission also clarified that the letters concerned an officer on deputation and did not relate to policy matters or the functioning of its information technology division.
The correspondence has drawn attention to how disagreements within the Commission are handled. Former Election Commissioner Ashok Lavasa sought clarity on whether the objections had been discussed internally, while political analyst Yogendra Yadav questioned why the commissioners approached the Cabinet Secretary.
