An RTI response shows that the Cabinet Secretariat forwarded complaints by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Sandhu and Vivek Joshi against senior deputy election commissioner Maneesh Garg to CEC Gyanesh Kumar and the DoPT.
The commissioners had alleged that Garg changed work-allocation arrangements without consulting them.
The disclosures come amid a separate controversy over changes to the ECI’s IT systems and access to electoral rolls.
The Cabinet Secretariat forwarded acknowledgement to letters written by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Sandhu and Vivek Joshi alleging misconduct by senior deputy election commissioner (DEC) Maneesh Garg to Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, in addition to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), according to documents obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, media reports said.
The documents show that the secretariat considered seeking Kumar’s opinion on the complaints but noted that the letters had been sent by the two commissioners in their individual capacities, rather than as formal communications from the Election Commission of India (ECI). The only response issued to Sandhu and Joshi was an acknowledgement of receipt.
Hindustan Times first reported on October 3 that the letters had been forwarded to the DoPT. The RTI response, provided to transparency activist Commodore Lokesh Batra (Retd.), reveals that the CEC’s office was also sent copies of the correspondence.
Cabinet Secretariat Notes Complaints Were Filed In Individual Capacity
According to the documents, a note dated August 3 proposed seeking CEC Kumar’s opinion on the letters. A subsequent note dated August 4 recorded that the communications were written by Sandhu and Joshi in their individual capacities and did not constitute formal correspondence from the ECI.
The secretariat also noted that any action could be “construed as interference” in a constitutional body. It recommended placing the matter on record with the DoPT for consideration in future decisions concerning Garg.
The secretariat issued acknowledgements dated August 5, with copies marked to the DoPT secretary, the department’s establishment officer and the principal private secretary to the CEC.
The letters had been sent to Cabinet Secretary TV Somanathan on July 29. Batra filed his RTI application on September 24, seeking details of the action taken on the complaints.
Sandhu’s letter included a copy of a work-allocation order issued by Garg on July 28, assigning responsibilities to himself and other ECI officials, including Director General (IT) Seema Khanna and DEC Sanjay Kumar.
According to the earlier report, the commissioners had raised concerns about Garg changing the routing of files belonging to the IT department under Khanna. The files had previously been routed through Kumar.
The letters stated that Garg was given additional charge of the Administration Division on July 28 while DEC Bhanu Prakash Yeturu was on leave until August 9. Within hours, Garg issued a work-allocation order covering officers senior or equivalent to him, the commissioners alleged. They said they had not been consulted before the order was issued.
Both commissioners cited Sections 18(1) and 18(2) of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023. Joshi also stated that a file he had sought from the Administration Division was not provided.
Complaints Emerge Amid Controversy Over ECI’s IT System
The correspondence has assumed significance amid a separate controversy over changes to the ECI’s information technology systems and access to electoral rolls.
An investigation by The Indian Express reported that a new IT protocol or system introduced by Khanna and approved by the ECI had restricted Electoral Registration Officers (EROs), who are responsible for adding or deleting voter names, from accessing the electoral rolls database.
The investigation also reported differences among election commissioners, including disagreements between Sandhu and Joshi on one side and CEC Kumar on the other.
The ECI has denied these claims, maintaining that its decisions were either unanimous or taken by a majority in accordance with the rules.
In response to Batra’s query about the steps taken on the complaints, the Cabinet Secretariat’s information officer listed the acknowledgements and the officials to whom copies had been forwarded. The RTI documents do not indicate that any substantive action was taken on the allegations against Garg.
