Bypassed Collegiate Norms at ECI
Two Commissioners Challenge Senior Bureaucracy
Government Overreach Over IT and Work-Allocation Control
The disclosures through Right to Information (RTI) applications (filed by transparency advocates such as Commodore Lokesh Batra) have brought to light a high-level administrative controversy within the Election Commission of India (ECI). The correspondence involves confidential letters written by two Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi to the Union Cabinet Secretary regarding internal decision-making and work allocations involving senior bureaucracy. The RTI application was filed by well-known transparency activist and retired naval officer Commodore Lokesh K. Batra on September 24. The Cabinet Secretariat supplied a total of 14 pages of documents in response to the RTI application.
The Core Catalyst: The Disputed Work-Allocation Order
The friction originated from administrative changes made on July 28, centered around the actions of a senior bureaucrat and Deputy Election Commissioner (DEC), Maneesh Garg. Unilateral Orders: According to the commissioners’ letters, Maneesh Garg who was given additional charge of the Administration Division while another DEC was on leave issued a work-allocation order affecting officers senior to and equivalent to him within hours of taking charge. Exclusion of the Commissioners: Commissioners Sandhu and Joshi maintained that these sweeping structural changes and re-allocations were executed without their knowledge or consultation. Dispute Over IT Files and Oversight: The order notably changed the routing of files concerning the IT department (which acts as the crucial backbone for electoral rolls and databases), effectively altering layers of institutional oversight.
Exposures and Arguments in the Commissioners’ Letters
In their separate, confidential letters dated July 29, both Election Commissioners raised serious institutional concerns: Violation of Statutory Provisions: The commissioners explicitly 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. They argued that bypassing the collegiate functioning of the poll panel violated statutory mandates which dictate that decisions must be made collectively (unanimously or by majority). Departure from Norms: They characterized the work-allocation move as a “radical departure from the norm” and contrary to the established past practices of the Commission. Administrative Non-Cooperation: Vivek Joshi further noted in his communication that administrative requests such as a specific file he had called for from the Administration Division were deliberately not provided to him.
The Paper Trail and Cabinet Secretariat’s Response
The RTI replies unearthed the exact administrative pathway and file notings tracking how the central government handled the letters: The Log: The two 10-page letters reached the Cabinet Secretariat on July 29 and were formally logged on July 30. Classification as “Individual Capacity“: File notings reveal that the Cabinet Secretariat treated the communication from the two Election Commissioners as being submitted in their “individual capacity. Forwarding to the CEC: Rather than executing an independent executive inquiry into the internal governance of the ECI, the Cabinet Secretariat forwarded the letters and file notings to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) and crucially to the Office of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC Gyanesh Kumar), noting that the CEC’s opinion or response should be factored in. Administrative Aftermath: Following the internal pushback by the two Commissioners, the contentious work-redistribution orders were ultimately not implemented, and the existing oversight structures over the IT division were preserved.
ECI’s Official Stance
In response to earlier media leaks regarding the friction, the Election Commission had issued a press release clarifying that the correspondence did not touch upon broader policy matters or core electoral IT policy, but rather centered strictly on the administrative functioning of an officer on deputation. However, the RTI documents confirm that a deep structural disagreement over internal command, file routing, and the application of the 2023 CEC Act did formally reach the highest tiers of the central government.
Editor, Prime Post
Ravindra Seshu Amaravadi, is a senior journalist with 38 years of experience in Telugu, English news papers and electronic media. He worked in Udayam as a sub-editor and reporter. Later, he was associated with Andhra Pradesh Times, Gemini news, Deccan Chronicle, HMTV and The Hans India. Earlier, he was involved in the research work of All India Kisan Sabha on suicides of cotton farmers. In Deccan Chronicle, he exposed the problems of subabul and chilli farmers and malpractices that took place in various government departments.
Email: ravindraseshu7@gmail.com
Mobile: 9063718675
