📷 Image: Wikimedia Commons / Jodmar at English Wikipedia
Politics
CM Ashok Gehlot’s remarks spark bureaucracy stir over post‑election board formation in Rajasthan
✍️ Amar Ujala · Rajasthan
🗓 17 Sep 2026, 01:31 PM
👁 8
Following Rajasthan’s recent local body elections, Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot’s comments targeting a CMO IAS officer have intensified political debate over the creation of election boards.
The state’s local body elections have concluded, and the next step is the constitution of election boards that will oversee the newly elected representatives. The process, typically handled by the Chief Minister’s Office (CMO), has become a flashpoint after the chief minister’s public remarks.
Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot hinted that a senior IAS officer attached to the CMO was being kept in a position of pressure to influence the board‑formation decisions. While he did not name the officer, the implication sparked a wave of concern within the bureaucracy about political interference.
Opposition parties, particularly the Bharatiya Janata Party, seized on the comments, alleging that the ruling party is attempting to manipulate the composition of the boards for partisan advantage. They demanded a transparent, merit‑based selection process and called for an inquiry into any undue pressure on civil servants.
The CMO has not issued an official response, and the IAS officer in question has remained silent. Administrative sources say that standard procedures are being followed, but the controversy has heightened scrutiny of the post‑election administrative arrangements.
Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot hinted that a senior IAS officer attached to the CMO was being kept in a position of pressure to influence the board‑formation decisions. While he did not name the officer, the implication sparked a wave of concern within the bureaucracy about political interference.
Opposition parties, particularly the Bharatiya Janata Party, seized on the comments, alleging that the ruling party is attempting to manipulate the composition of the boards for partisan advantage. They demanded a transparent, merit‑based selection process and called for an inquiry into any undue pressure on civil servants.
The CMO has not issued an official response, and the IAS officer in question has remained silent. Administrative sources say that standard procedures are being followed, but the controversy has heightened scrutiny of the post‑election administrative arrangements.