Cabinet Secretariat Declines Action on Election Commissioners’ Complaints Against Manish Garg

The Cabinet Secretariat has declined to initiate action against senior Election Commission official Manish Garg based on complaints submitted by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi. The matter came to light through documents disclosed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The two commissioners reportedly wrote separate letters to Cabinet Secretary T. V. Somanathan on July 29, raising concerns about Garg’s decisions regarding the allocation of responsibilities among senior officials. They alleged that he had changed work assignments unilaterally without consulting the Election Commission or the officials concerned. Vivek Joshi also reportedly stated that earlier directions had been ignored and that requests for related files had not received a response. Both commissioners argued that the changes were inconsistent with established procedures and provisions of the 2023 law governing the appointment, service conditions and tenure of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners.

In its response, the Cabinet Secretariat reportedly stated that the Election Commission is an independent constitutional body and that the executive should not interfere in its functioning. Since the letters did not constitute an official communication from all members of the Commission, the Secretariat said it would not be appropriate to treat them as a collective institutional complaint and initiate action on that basis. It acknowledged receiving the letters and advised that copies be forwarded to the Chief Election Commissioner’s office. It also sent a note to the relevant departments asking them to consider the matter when making future decisions concerning Garg. Separately, on September 26, the Election Commission stated that the work-allocation orders issued by Garg had not been implemented on the instructions of the two commissioners. It clarified that the dispute concerned an officer on deputation and was not related to broader policy issues or the functioning of the Information Technology division.