Meet Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, Vivek Joshi - No action by govt despite ECs flagging conduct of an ECI official, RTI shows

Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had separately written to Cabinet Secretary T V Somanathan on July 29, raising concerns over the conduct of Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg and his alleged changes to the work allocation of senior officials in the poll body.

However, the Cabinet Secretariat decided against initiating action, observing that the complaints were made in the Commissioners' "individual capacity" and without “any official communication from the Commission as a whole, any action at this stage may be inappropriate”, documents released under the Right to Information (RTI) Act show.

The letters, provided in an RTI response to activist Commodore Lokesh K Batra (retd), alleged that Garg had revised the responsibilities of senior officers without consulting the Commission or obtaining its approval, according to PTI. The Cabinet Secretariat acknowledged receipt of both communications on August 5 and marked them to the Department of Personnel and Training, the Establishment Officer and the office of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC).

Who are Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi?

Sandhu and Joshi are the two Election Commissioners who raised the complaints against Garg. They sent separate communications to Somanathan on July 29, seeking appropriate action over the officer's conduct and changes to the internal work allocation in the Election Commission.

Sandhu, 63, is a former Uttarakhand chief secretary. He completed his MBBS at Government Medical College, Amritsar, and later earned a Master of Arts degree in History from Guru Nanak Dev University in the same city. He also holds a degree in law.

Joshi, 60, is a former Haryana chief secretary. He previously served as India's Personnel Secretary from August 19 to October 31, 2024, after heading the Department of Financial Services as its Secretary.

Born in Uttar Pradesh on May 21, 1966, he holds a bachelor's degree in Mechanical Engineering from IIT Roorkee and a postgraduate diploma in International Business from the Indian Institute of Foreign Trade (IIFT), New Delhi. He later earned a master's degree and a PhD in International Economics from the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies.

Both were appointed as Election Commissioners in March 2024.

What did the Election Commissioners allege in their letters?

The two Commissioners alleged that Garg, after taking charge as the link officer of the Deputy Election Commissioner (Administration), issued an order changing the work allocation among senior deputy election commissioners, deputy election commissioners, directors general and officers of equivalent rank.

According to a Cabinet note included in the RTI response, the Commissioners said Garg had made the changes without discussing them with the Commission or the officers concerned. They also alleged that he had acted despite repeated oral and written instructions against making such changes without prior discussion or approval.

"Both the ECs have stated that Shri Garg, after assuming the charge as link officer of DEC (Admn), has issued an order regarding work allocation of equivalent and senior officers to him without discussing the revised work allocation with the Commission or the officers concerned. Further, the aforementioned ECs have stated that this has happened despite repeated oral and written instructions to all concerned officers against taking such actions without prior discussion/approval of the Commission," the Cabinet note said.

The Commissioners described Garg's actions as a violation of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023. Joshi also alleged that when he sought the relevant file from the Administration Division, it was not provided to him.

Why did the Cabinet Secretariat not act on the complaints?

A Cabinet note prepared on August 3, 2026, initially proposed seeking the CEC's opinion on the matter.

"In this connection, we may request the Chief Election Commissioner for his opinion on the issue. Accordingly, a draft DO is put up for approval, please."

However, a subsequent note dated August 4 said taking action on complaints from two Election Commissioners without an official communication from the Commission as a whole could amount to interference in the functioning of the constitutional body.

"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 working and functioning of the Commission are governed by the rules and guidelines of the Election Commission. The above communications are from the Election Commissioners in their individual capacity and, while they must be taken with due seriousness, they cannot be seen as a formal communication from the Commission as a whole," the note said.

It further observed that although Garg had been appointed by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC), he was now an officer of the Election Commission, and his work and conduct were governed by the poll body's rules and guidelines.

The note also referred to Section 18 of the 2023 Act, which provides that the Commission's business should be transacted unanimously as far as possible, with differences of opinion settled by a majority.

"Election Commissioners have 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 construed as interference in the functioning of the Constitutional Body. Hence, it would be appropriate to send acknowledgement to both Election Commissioners with a copy to PPS to CEC for information of CEC," the note said.

The draft was signed by Somanathan and marked to the Secretary of the Department of Personnel and Training and the Establishment Officer. It also stated that the complaints would be placed on record to "enable it to be taken into account in future decision-making regarding the officer".

What was the Election Commission's response?

The Indian Express had reported in September that the two Commissioners approached the Cabinet Secretary after a work allocation order issued within the poll body raised concerns about centralising powers related to adding or deleting names and updating voter records, instead of leaving such responsibilities with officials at the state level.

In a statement issued on September 26, the Election Commission said the revised work allocation orders had not been implemented following directions from the two Commissioners. It also maintained that the complaints sent to the Cabinet Secretary concerned an officer on deputation and not policy or IT division matters.