RTI reveals Cabinet Secretariat sent election commissioners’ letters to CEC Gyanesh Kumar

The Cabinet Secretariat forwarded the letters written to the Cabinet Secretary by election commissioners Sukhbir Sandhu and Vivek Joshi about the alleged misconduct of senior deputy election commissioner (DEC) Maneesh Garg to the office of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, in addition to sending them to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), according to information obtained through a Right to Information (RTI) application.A document released in response to the application shows that on August 3, the secretariat proposed asking CEC Kumar for his opinion on the letters.

Another, on August 4, noted that the letters from the commissioners were in their individual capacity and not a formal communication from the Election Commission of India. The only response to the two commissioners was an acknowledgement that their letters had been received. The acknowledgements dated August 5 were copied to the secretary, department of personnel and training (DoPT), the establishment officer in DoPT, and the principal private secretary to the chief election commissioner.Hindustan Times first reported on October 3, the details of the letters and the fact that they had been forwarded to DoPT, but the RTI reply shows that the CEC was also sent a copy.

HT also reported that the Cabinet Secretary did not act on the letters because they had not been written by the Election Commission, but the two commissioners in their individual capacity.Also read: How ECI identifies, removes duplicate electoral roll entries Secretariat flags risk of interference in constitutional bodyThe documents released under the RTI Act to transparency activist Commodore Lokesh Batra (Retd.) show that in its note dated August 4, the secretariat noted that any step that could be “construed as interference” in a constitutional body.

It also recommended that the matter be placed on record with DoPT for future decisions on the officer concerned, Garg.Batra filed his application on September 24.The nearly identical letters were sent to cabinet secretary TV Somanathan on July 29. Sandhu’s letter was accompanied by the copy of an order issued by Garg on July 28 allocating work to himself and other EC officials, including director general IT Seema Khanna and DEC Sanjay Kumar.Also read: Any fresh impeachment motion to remove CEC Gyanesh Kumar will follow due process: Om BirlaDispute centred on routing of IT department filesAccording to a Hindustan Times report dated October 3, the commissioners were concerned about Garg’s decision to change the routing of files of the IT department under Khanna.

The files had earlier gone to Kumar.In their confidential letters to the Cabinet Secretary, the commissioners said Garg was given additional charge of the Administration Division on July 28, while DEC Bhanu Prakash Yeturu was on leave until August 9. Within hours, they said, he issued a work-allocation order covering officers senior and equivalent to him. The letters said the commissioners were not consulted on the decision.

Both cited Sections 18(1) and 18(2) of the 2023 CEC/EC Act. Joshi added that a file he asked for from the Administration Division was not provided.Also read: UN experts slam India’s ‘heavy-handed’ crackdown on youth-led protestsRTI response lists acknowledgements and endorsementsIn reply to Batra’s question on “steps taken,” the Cabinet Secretariat’s information officer listed the acknowledgments and endorsements.The letters, and the response, are significant because Khanna and the IT department are at the heart of a controversy after an investigation by the Indian Express said that the new IT protocol/system put in place by Khanna and approved by the Election Commission, shut the database of electors (the rolls) from the very people responsible for adding or deleting names, Electoral Registration Officials (EROs).The Express investigation also reported that there were differences between the election commissioners, and that Joshi and Sandhu had disagreed several times with CEC Kumar.

The Election Commission has denied this and said that all decisions were either unanimous or taken by a majority in keeping with the rules.