A high-level committee chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi convened in New Delhi on Wednesday to deliberate on appointments to key positions in the Central Information Commission (CIC) and the Vigilance Commission, but the session saw a notable dissent from Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi.

The 90-minute meeting was attended by PM Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah, and Rahul Gandhi. The committee’s agenda included recommending appointments for the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC), one Vigilance Commissioner, and eight Information Commissioners, positions that have been lying vacant for months. According to people familiar with the proceedings, Gandhi rejected the shortlisted candidates and formally submitted a dissent note highlighting what he described as systemic exclusion of marginalized communities from top bureaucratic and constitutional positions.

Rahul Gandhi raised concerns over the underrepresentation of Dalits, backward classes, tribal groups, and minority communities—who together comprise nearly 90% of India’s population—from the pool of applicants and the shortlisted candidates for these positions. Sources said that Gandhi pointed out that this exclusion has been a recurring issue in appointments to constitutional and autonomous institutions, a concern he had repeatedly voiced in the run-up to the 2024 general elections.

Following his intervention, both PM Modi and Amit Shah reportedly agreed to consider a few appointments from the limited applicant pool that could address the diversity concerns. However, at the time of reporting, formal confirmation from the government on any changes was still awaited.

Functionaries aware of the discussion said that Gandhi had previously requested details regarding the caste and community composition of applicants for the posts. This information was provided during the meeting, revealing that less than 7% of applicants belonged to Scheduled Castes, and only one candidate among the shortlisted names was from these groups. This, Gandhi argued, underscored the systemic nature of the exclusion in top-level appointments.

The selection process for the CIC and Information Commissioners is governed by Section 12(3) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The law mandates that a committee, chaired by the Prime Minister and including the Leader of the Opposition along with a Union Minister nominated by the PM, is responsible for recommending names for appointment. These recommendations are then forwarded to the President for formal approval.

The Chief Information Commissioner post has remained vacant since September 2025, while the eight Information Commissioner positions have been vacant since November 2023. The prolonged vacancies have sparked concerns over the commission’s ability to function efficiently, especially given its critical role in ensuring transparency and accountability in governance under the RTI Act.

Sources said that during the meeting, Gandhi emphasized the need for equitable representation in appointments, arguing that including members from marginalized communities would strengthen institutional credibility and public trust. He suggested that failing to address this systemic underrepresentation not only undermines constitutional principles but also weakens the functioning of autonomous bodies.

While the government side reportedly acknowledged the concerns, the committee’s deliberations ended with no immediate consensus on the appointments, and the matter is expected to be reviewed further. The formal dissent note submitted by Gandhi serves as a record of his objection to the current shortlist and highlights the broader issue of diversity in top-level bureaucratic positions.

The vacancies in the Vigilance Commission and CIC have significant administrative implications. Both bodies play key roles in governance oversight: the Vigilance Commission monitors anti-corruption measures across government institutions, while the CIC ensures compliance with transparency and accountability under the RTI Act. Delays in appointments can impact the effectiveness of these institutions in safeguarding public interest.

The committee meeting and Gandhi’s dissent come amid ongoing debates on representation and inclusivity in public appointments, with various political actors and civil society groups emphasizing the need for greater participation of historically marginalized communities in decision-making positions.

As the process moves forward, the government will need to balance merit-based considerations with inclusivity mandates to ensure that appointments reflect the diversity of Indian society. The final selections for the CIC and Information Commissioner posts are expected to be announced only after careful consideration of these factors, with the Prime Minister-led committee playing a pivotal role in the decision-making process.

In summary, the PM-led committee’s meeting on Wednesday marked a critical juncture in the appointment process for key transparency and vigilance bodies in India, highlighting both procedural challenges and broader concerns about equitable representation of marginalized communities in constitutional institutions. Rahul Gandhi’s dissent note underscores the importance of addressing systemic exclusion and ensuring that appointments reflect India’s diverse social fabric.