ECI Officials’ Work Allocation Sparks Internal Dispute
Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi sought action over an official’s order, while Cabinet Secretariat records caution against intervention.
- Two commissioners object to revised work allocation
- Letters seek action against senior Commission official
- Cabinet Secretariat cautions against intervening directly
- RTI records do not confirm further action
GG News Bureau
New Delhi, 23rd Oct: Two Election Commissioners, Dr. Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Dr. Vivek Joshi, wrote separate letters to Cabinet Secretary T. V. Somanathan on July 29, raising objections to a senior Election Commission official’s conduct and seeking appropriate action, according to documents released under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The letters concerned Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg and an order he issued revising the allocation of work among senior officers. Both commissioners alleged that the changes were made without prior discussion with the Commission or the officers concerned.
In his letter, Sandhu stated that Garg was given additional charge of the Administration Division on July 28 during Deputy Election Commissioner Bhanu Prakash Yeturu’s leave. Within hours, Garg issued an order changing work assignments among senior deputy election commissioners, deputy election commissioners, director generals and equivalent officers.
Sandhu alleged that Garg assigned responsibilities to himself and officers senior or equivalent to him, despite repeated instructions against making such changes without prior discussion or approval. He cited Sections 18(1) and 18(2) of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, and sought appropriate action.
Joshi raised similar concerns in his separate letter. He alleged that the revised allocation was issued without consultation and said the Administration Division did not provide the relevant file when he requested it. He also cited the Commission’s earlier instructions and alleged a violation of the 2023 Act.
The Cabinet Secretariat’s internal note acknowledged the seriousness of the communications but cautioned against intervening without an official communication from the Commission as a whole. It observed that the letters had been sent by the commissioners in their individual capacities and could not be treated as a formal communication from the constitutional body.
The note recommended acknowledging both letters and forwarding copies to senior officials in the Department of Personnel and Training, the Establishment Officer and the Chief Election Commissioner’s office. Cabinet Secretary Somanathan acknowledged the letters on August 5, 2026.
The RTI disclosure also included orders confirming that Garg had been given interim charge of the Administration Division during Yeturu’s leave, from July 27 to August 9, and that a separate order revised the distribution of work among Commission officials.
The RTI application was filed on September 24 by Commodore Lokesh K. Batra (Retd.), who sought copies of the correspondence, details of action taken and relevant file notings. The Cabinet Secretariat provided 14 pages of documents after the prescribed fee was paid.
The records confirm that both commissioners formally raised objections and received acknowledgements. However, the disclosure does not establish whether any inquiry or further action followed.
