A letter sent to the cabinet secretary by the two election commissioners, Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi, was regarding the functioning of a senior deputy election commissioner (DEC), a person privy to the developments told HT on Sunday, a day after the poll panel clarified that the communication had nothing to do with its policy matters.
Letter to Cabinet Secretary Raises Concerns on Poll Official
A letter addressed to cabinet secretary TV Somanathan, dated July 29, has come to light, concerning a senior official involved in election-related matters. The individual who revealed this information requested anonymity and did not disclose the letter’s contents, labeling it as a “classified” matter.
In a press note after a meeting on Saturday, the poll panel said: “The letter to Cabinet Secretary was not related to any policy matter of the Commission or IT division but related to working of an officer on deputation to ECI. Henceforth, all the new initiatives about IT modules and portals will be discussed in the Committee of Officers…before approval by the Commission,” ECI’s press note on Saturday said. Officials generally take up such matters involving the functioning of personnel with the chief election commissioner (CEC). Had the letter been against CEC Gyanesh Kumar himself, protocol would have dictated that it be marked to the President. The work re-distribution orders issued by the concerned officer were not actually implemented after the orders of the two Commissioners and the oversight over the IT division by the DEC was never actually withdrawn. “Various upgradations of the portal have already been made based on the inputs from State CEOs [chief electoral officers] in the past few months. In case, any further flexibility is required by the field officers, that will be made operational. Union of India.
Article 324(2) provides that the President appoints the CEC and other Election Commissioners, subject to any law made by Parliament. In March 2023, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court delivered its judgment in Anoop Baranwal v. Earlier reporting noted: The Constitution Bench held that until Parliament made a law under Article 324(2), appointments to the Election Commission would be made on the recommendation of a three-member committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India.
Amid the controversy, the commission said field officers have role-based access to the ECINET system as per their statutory powers. It added that a panel headed by a senior DEC and including an independent expert from the IITs/IIITs “will review the ECINET to double-check that it complies with the provisions of the Acts and Rules and submit report to the Commission”. Earlier reporting noted: Article 324 of the Constitution vests the “superintendence, direction and control” of elections in the Election Commission of India (ECI). The court said the arrangement would operate only until Parliament enacted a law on the subject.
Earlier reporting noted: For several decades, Parliament had not enacted a law laying down the procedure for these appointments. This led to a challenge before the Supreme Court on the question of how the independence of the ECI could be protected when its members were appointed by the executive.
