- Two Election Commissioners raised concerns about senior ECI official.
- Cabinet Secretariat declined action, citing ECI's constitutional independence.
- Complaints were individual, not official communication from Commission.
Amid the ongoing row over the Election Commission of India's (ECI) Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, fresh details have emerged showing that two Election Commissioners, Dr Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Dr Vivek Joshi, wrote separate letters to Cabinet Secretary T V Somanathan on July 29, 2026, raising concerns over the conduct of a senior Commission official and seeking appropriate action, according to records released under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The development follows a report by The Indian Express alleging that Sandhu and Joshi had raised objections at least 14 times over 10 months to decisions and orders allegedly issued without their knowledge.
However, the RTI report does not mention the SIR electoral process.
The Cabinet Secretariat decided not to take action against a senior official inside the Election Commission after two Election Commissioners complained about him. According to government records made public through an RTI (Right to Information) reply, the Cabinet Secretariat felt that stepping in would mean "interference in the functioning of the Constitutional Body."
It noted that the letters had been sent in their "individual capacity". It added that, in the absence of "any official communication from the Commission as a whole, any action at this stage may be inappropriate", according to documents provided in an RTI response to activist Commodore Lokesh K Batra (retd).
Recommended For You
"Election Commissioners 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 had said.
Why did the election commissioners write separate letters to the Cabinet Secretary?
The two Election Commissioners wrote separate letters to Cabinet Secretary T. V. Somanathan on July 29, 2026, raising concerns about the functioning of Senior Deputy Election Commissioner (Sr DEC) Maneesh Garg, an IAS officer who was appointed to the Commission by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet on September 2, 2024.
Garg issued an order changing work duties for senior officers without informing or getting approval from the Commissioners.
Two Election Commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, wrote separate secret letters to Cabinet Secretary T V Somanathan on July 29. They accused Garg of violating the rules and a 2023 law.
In September, The Indian Express also reported that Sandhu and Joshi had written to the Cabinet Secretary after a work allocation order was issued within the poll body. The order allegedly "threatened to concentrate the powers" within the Election Commission to add or delete names and update electoral rolls, instead of allowing officials at the state level to carry out these tasks.
In response to the Indian express report, on September 26, Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar and Election Commissioners Sandhu and Joshi issued point-by-point clarifications on the SIR of electoral rolls. It said that the work redistribution orders issued by the officer concerned were never implemented following directions from the two commissioners.
The poll panel also said the letters sent by Sandhu and Joshi to the Cabinet Secretary concerned an officer on deputation and did not relate to policy or IT division matters.
"Both the ECs have stated that Shri Garg, after assuming the charge as link officer of DEC (Admn), 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 aforementioned ECs have 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," a Cabinet note provided in the RTI response said.
Why the Government Refused to Step In
When the Cabinet Secretariat first received the complaint on August 3, 2026, officials initially drafted a note suggesting they ask the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) for his opinion.
A Cabinet note prepared on the complaint on August 3 had said, "In this connection, we may request the Chief Election Commissioner for his opinion on the issue. Accordingly, a draft DO is put up for approval, please."
However, by the next day, the government changed its stance. The final notes explained that because the Election Commission is an independent body, the government must stay out of its internal matters.
"The Commission 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. "The above communications are from the Election Commissioners 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.
The Cabinet Secretariat pointed out that the letters came from the two commissioners "in their individual capacity" and were "not seen as a formal communication from the Commission as a whole."
It said, 'Although Maneesh Garg has been appointed by the ACC (Appointments Committee of the Cabinet), he is now an officer of the Election Commission of India, and his work and conduct are to be regulated and monitored by the rules and guidelines of the Election Commission of India.'
Under Section 18 of the 2023 law, the Commission is supposed to work together as a team (unanimously or by majority). Therefore, the Cabinet Secretary noted, "Election Commissioners 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."
Instead of taking disciplinary action against the officer, the Cabinet Secretary simply acknowledged receiving the letters and filed them away. The official documents will "enable it to be taken into account in future decision-making regarding the officer", and copies were sent to the Chief Election Commissioner to keep him informed.
The Cabinet Secretary had acknowledged the receipt of the two letters on August 5, 2026, and sent copies to the Department of Personnel and Training, the Establishment Officer and the office of the Chief Election Commissioner.