Centre Took No Action On 2 ECs’ Complaints Against Poll Officer
The matter was also forwarded to the personnel department for consideration in future decisions concerning the officer.
New Delhi:The Cabinet Secretariat took no action on complaints by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi against a senior Election Commission officer, citing concerns that intervention without a formal communication from the poll panel could amount to interference in a constitutional body, an RTI reply has revealed.
The two Commissioners had separately written to Cabinet Secretary T.V. Somanathan on July 29, raising concerns over the conduct of senior deputy election commissioner Maneesh Garg, who was appointed by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet in September 2024.
Documents released under the RTI Act to activist Commodore Lokesh K. Batra (retd) show that Sandhu and Joshi accused Garg of issuing orders reallocating work among senior officers without consulting the Commission or obtaining its approval, despite repeated instructions against such decisions.
The Commissioners alleged that Garg's actions violated the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023.
A Cabinet Secretariat note prepared on August 3 initially proposed seeking the Chief Election Commissioner's opinion. However, a subsequent note held that the complaints had been made by the Commissioners in their individual capacities and did not constitute an official communication from the Commission.
"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 note said.
It observed that although Garg had been appointed by the ACC, his conduct was governed by Election Commission rules. Citing Section 18 of the 2023 Act, it noted that Commission decisions should be unanimous as far as possible, with differences settled by majority.
The Secretariat concluded that taking action without a formal communication from the Commission could be inappropriate and construed as executive interference.
The note, signed by Somanathan, directed that acknowledgements be sent to both Commissioners, with a copy to the Chief Election Commissioner. The matter was also forwarded to the personnel department for consideration in future decisions concerning the officer.
The Election Commission had clarified on September 26 that Garg's work redistribution orders were never implemented following directions from the two Commissioners. It maintained that their complaints concerned the conduct of an officer on deputation, rather than policy or IT matters.