Cabinet secretary copied confirmation sent by letters to two ECs to CEC for ‘information’: RTI reply

Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar with Election Commissioner Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Dr. Vivek Joshi. File | Photo credit: Sushil Kumar Verma

Days after two Election Commissioners (EC) SS Sandhu and Vivek Joshi wrote to Cabinet Secretary TV Somanathan on July 29 regarding the work of Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg, the Secretariat sent a receipt to the two with a copy to Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar for his “information”, revealing the right to information.

The Cabinet Secretariat noted that the letters were from the EC in their individual capacity and while they should be taken seriously, they cannot be taken as a formal communication from the Election Commission of India (ECI) as a whole. In the absence of any official communication from the commission, any action may be construed as “interference”.

The RTI application was filed by Commodore (retired) Lokesh Batra.

Allocation of work

A Cabinet Secretariat file dated August 3 said the two ECs said Mr Garg, after taking charge as Liaison Officer DEC (Administration), issued an order regarding the allocation of work to equivalent and senior officers without discussing the revised work distribution with the commission or the officers concerned. The EC further stated that this was done despite repeated verbal and written instructions to all officials against taking such measures without prior discussion/approval of the commission.

“In this context, we can ask the Chief Electoral Commissioner for a statement on this matter. In accordance with this, please submit a proposal to the DO for approval,” it said.

However, the very next day, August 4, the file states that “the commission is a constitutional body and has been insulated from executive interference since its inception to ensure that it operates independently and transparently.”

“The above communications are from the EC in their individual capacity and, while they are to be taken with due seriousness, cannot be regarded as formal communications from the commission as a whole”.

He further states that the EC has 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 seen as interfering with the functioning of a constitutional body”.

And therefore it will be appropriate to send a confirmation to both ECs with a copy of PPS to CEC for “CEC information”.

A copy was also marked for sending to Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training as Mr. Garg was an All India Service Officer and also a Commissioned Officer of ACC.

“The draft DO can be drawn up accordingly,” it said.

Subsequently, on August 5, Mr. Somanathan wrote to both ECs that he had confirmed the letters, with a copy of the PPS to the CEC.

However, it was not clear from the RTI replies whether Mr. Gyanesh Kumar had in any way responded to or acknowledged the information received from the Cabinet Secretariat.

Published – 22 Oct 2026 22:16 IST