The Hindu : National : Central Information Commission's order stayed

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Apr 25, 2007
ePaper


<![if lt IE 4]> <script src="http://servedbyadbutler.com/adserve/;ID=150167;size=468x60;setID=96691;type=js" type="text/javascript"> </script> <noscript> <a href="http://servedbyadbutler.com/go2/;ID=150167;size=468x60;setID=96691"> <img src="http://servedbyadbutler.com/adserve.ibs/;ID=150167;size=468x60;setID=96691;type=img" border="0" height="60" width="468" alt=""></a> </noscript><![endif]>

National

National

Central Information Commission's order stayed

Staff Reporter

It directed Centre to disclose records on judge's elevation

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday stayed an order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) directing the Centre to disclose the records relating to elevation of the erstwhile Acting Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, Justice Vijender Jain, as Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court this past January.

The Commission had also directed the Centre to disclose the Supreme Court collegium's decision and the Union Law Ministry's recommendation to the Prime Minister sent finally to the President relating to Mr. Justice Jain's appointment.

Justice B. D. Ahmed of the High Court stayed the order on an appeal by the Centre.

Mr. Justice Ahmed also issued notices, returnable on May 25, to the Centre and the person on whose application the Commission had passed the directions under the Right to Information Act (RTI).

`Documents classified'

The Centre submitted that the documents in question were classified, and therefore could not be made public. Besides, the documents had exemption against making them public under Section 8 (1) (e) of the Right to Information Act, submitted counsel for the Government.

The Commission headed by Wajahat Habibullah had in its order in March this year directed that the records be made available to Subhash Chander Agrawal who had sought them under the RTI Act.

The CIC order had come on an appeal by Mr. Agrawal against the order of the Chief Principal Information Officer (CPIO) of the Department of Justice of the Union Law Ministry, denying him the records on the ground that disclosure of such information would violate a "fiduciary relationship under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act" because it was protected under the confidentiality clause.

President A. P. J. Abdul Kalam had returned the file relating to Mr. Justice Jain's appointment to the Prime Minister after certain reports had appeared in the media pertaining to a judgment delivered by him and had sought clarifications from the Govt. as well as the collegium.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National