Neta·ResumeAt least 14 objections by Sandhu and Joshi, November 2025 to August 2026.
The Indian Express (23 Sep 2026, Ritika Chopra) reported at least 14 formal, on-record objections by Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi between November 2025 and August 2026, including four on a single day, grouped around four subjects: the Form 6 change, centralised IT control of the roll software, appeals against restored West Bengal voters, and custody of the roll database. The published reports do not itemise all 14 (sir-rules-ie-14-objections-report); this file lists only the 12 the entries independently document, each with its own dated note or letter. The record does not say which single day carried four objections, so none is guessed here; 16 April 2026 is the only date on which two distinct, separately-dated objections (entries 2 and 3) are both recorded, and 29 July 2026 the only date on which two Commissioners separately made the same objection (entries 7 and 8).
The Indian Express’s report says 2 more objections are reported but not itemised in its published account — shown as the dashed circles above, past August 2026.
| No. | Date | By | Concerns |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4 Nov 2025 | Sukhbir Singh Sandhu | On Sandhu's direction, the Deputy Election Commissioner told the IT division that only EROs, DEOs and CEOs may exercise the statutory roll-management powers, and that IT systems must comply strictly with the law. |
| 2 | 16 Apr 2026 | Sukhbir Singh Sandhu | Sandhu told senior officers that communications were going out in the Commission's name without its approval and that all future ones must have it, citing the 2023 Act. |
| 3 | 16 Apr 2026 | Sukhbir Singh Sandhu | The same day, Sandhu recorded that the IT division had built new modules and portals without bringing them to him or the Commission, and that he had learned of them from the media; he asked that the Director General (IT) be directed to brief all members and obtain approvals. |
| 4 | 24 Apr 2026 | Vivek Joshi | Eight days after Sandhu, Joshi told the same officers that several communications were being sent in the Commission's name without its approval, citing Article 324 and the 2023 Act. |
| 5 | 16 May 2026 | Vivek Joshi | On a proposal to change Form 6 through the SIR framework, Joshi recorded that Forms 6 and 8 are statutory and cannot be altered without amending the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, and that the lawful course was to route the proposal through government rulemaking; Sandhu concurred on file three days later. |
“Commission: differing notes are normal; all SIR decisions were unanimous”
The Commission said written notes and differing views among its members are standard deliberation before decisions, that Commissioners' suggestions were for improving processes, and that all its decisions over the past year, including the SIR, were unanimous decisions of the full Commission. It said ECINET runs under strict security and audit controls and that EROs and DEOs exercise their statutory powers of registration and deletion.
Sukhbir Singh SandhuOn Sandhu's direction, the Deputy Election Commissioner told the IT division that only EROs, DEOs and CEOs may exercise the statutory roll-management powers, and that IT systems must comply strictly with the law.DetailsHideNothing further in the record.
| 6 | 29 May 2026 | Vivek Joshi | Joshi wrote to the CEC, Sandhu and the Deputy Election Commissioner about the 'gradual centralisation' of the electoral roll database and proposed two committees, including an outside IIT expert, to certify who holds credentials to change it and that ECINet complies with the law. |
| 7 | 29 Jul 2026 | Sukhbir Singh Sandhu | Sandhu wrote separately to the Cabinet Secretary seeking action against Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg, whose 28 July work-allocation order had removed Deputy Election Commissioner Sanjay Kumar's oversight of the IT division without consulting the Commission, calling it a clear violation of the law governing the Commission. |
| 8 | 29 Jul 2026 | Vivek Joshi | The same day, Joshi separately wrote to the Cabinet Secretary making the same charge against Garg's order. |
| 9 | 30 Jul 2026 | Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi | The two Commissioners jointly set aside Garg's 28 July work-allocation order as made without reason or justification, directing that the previous allocation continue until the Commission reached consensus. |
| 10 | Aug 2026 | Sukhbir Singh Sandhu | Sandhu asked Commission officials who had authorised and who had actually filed appeals on the ECI's behalf against West Bengal voters that judicial officers had included on the roll, recording that neither he, Joshi nor the West Bengal CEO had been told. |
| 11 | 13 Aug 2026 | Sukhbir Singh Sandhu | Sandhu called the SIR-linked declaration added to online Form 6 'unauthorised and illegal' and directed the Deputy Election Commissioner and DG (IT) to remove it. |
| 12 | 14 Aug 2026 | Sukhbir Singh Sandhu | Sandhu recorded that the DG (IT) had no legal authority to restrict statutory roll officers' access to ERONet, and directed that full access be restored to them. |
| 2 more not itemised in the published reports. |
Sukhbir Singh SandhuSandhu told senior officers that communications were going out in the Commission's name without its approval and that all future ones must have it, citing the 2023 Act.DetailsHideVivek Joshi issued a similar direction on 24 April 2026 (objection 4).
Sukhbir Singh SandhuThe same day, Sandhu recorded that the IT division had built new modules and portals without bringing them to him or the Commission, and that he had learned of them from the media; he asked that the Director General (IT) be directed to brief all members and obtain approvals.DetailsHideNothing further in the record.
Nothing further in the record.
The Indian Express reported that by July 2026 the online Form 6 on ECINET carried the added SIR-linked declaration without a notified rule change (see entry), which drew Sandhu's 13 August objection (objection 11).
Sandhu endorsed the proposal on 13 July 2026; on 14 August he recorded that he knew of no action taken on it.
Sukhbir Singh SandhuSandhu wrote separately to the Cabinet Secretary seeking action against Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg, whose 28 July work-allocation order had removed Deputy Election Commissioner Sanjay Kumar's oversight of the IT division without consulting the Commission, calling it a clear violation of the law governing the Commission.DetailsHideJoshi wrote separately to the Cabinet Secretary the same day (objection 8); the two jointly set the work-allocation order aside the next day (objection 9).
Sandhu and Joshi jointly set the work-allocation order aside the next day (objection 9).
Both commissionersThe two Commissioners jointly set aside Garg's 28 July work-allocation order as made without reason or justification, directing that the previous allocation continue until the Commission reached consensus.DetailsHideThe CEC and both Election Commissioners held their first full meeting in four months on 9 September 2026.
Sukhbir Singh SandhuSandhu asked Commission officials who had authorised and who had actually filed appeals on the ECI's behalf against West Bengal voters that judicial officers had included on the roll, recording that neither he, Joshi nor the West Bengal CEO had been told.DetailsHideThe ECI told the Supreme Court on 18 Sep 2026 that 16.10 lakh appeals sought deletion of included voters, without saying who had filed them.
Sukhbir Singh SandhuSandhu called the SIR-linked declaration added to online Form 6 'unauthorised and illegal' and directed the Deputy Election Commissioner and DG (IT) to remove it.DetailsHideNothing further in the record.
Sukhbir Singh SandhuSandhu recorded that the DG (IT) had no legal authority to restrict statutory roll officers' access to ERONet, and directed that full access be restored to them.DetailsHideNothing further in the record.