The Hindu : National : Supreme Court registry challenges CIC order

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Sunday, Jan 18, 2009
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

National

National

Supreme Court registry challenges CIC order

Legal Correspondent

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Registry on Friday filed an appeal in the Delhi High Court against an order passed by the Central Information Commission (CIC), asking it to provide information in the possession of the Chief Justice of India (CJI), on declaration of assets by judges of the apex court and High Courts.

By its January 6 order the CIC had directed the Registry to furnish to S.C. Agrawal, an applicant, information whether judges declared their assets as per a May 7, 1997 resolution adopted at an all-India judges conference.

The CIC rejected the Supreme Court’s contention that the CJI was not obliged to furnish such information under the Right to Information Act. Nor did the CIC agree with the plea that the Registry and the CJI’s office were independent.

Assailing this order, the Registry said: “The decision of the CIC is ex facie erroneous and without jurisdiction in as much as it ignores the scheme and purpose underlying the Right to Information Act. The decision raises far reaching issues of public importance pertaining to the highest judicial body under our Constitution namely the Supreme Court of India and will have far reaching consequences.

“The information sought for is not information which is in the public domain and as such, the application filed by the respondent was not at all maintainable. The Right to Information Act was designed to obtain information under the control of public authorities. The definition of “information” under Section 2(f) of the Act shows that the information which is required to be given must be information in the public domain and information which is required to be maintained in accordance with law or under some provision of law.”

The appeal by Solicitor General G.E. Vahanvati said: “There is nothing under the Constitution or under any other law which requires the Judges of the Supreme Court to declare their assets to the Chief Justice of India. The fact that this is done under an informal resolution dated May 7, 1997 shows that it is purely voluntary and not required to be given under any legal provision and there can be no sanction for non-furnishing of such information.

“The information which can be called for must be information which is required to be given to a public authority and accordingly held by it or in its control. Voluntary declaration of assets by judges made to the Chief Justice of India cannot be said to be material which is held by or under the control of a public authority.

“Apart from the fact that the CJI is the head of judiciary, the office of the CJI is altogether distinct from the Supreme Court of India as an institution. The office of the CJI performs several distinct and unique functions. The CJI is not a Public Authority, as defined in Section 2(h) of Right to Information Act, and therefore, is not required to designate a Central Public Information Officer for it, or to supply the information held or maintained by it [him]. In these circumstances it cannot be said that the office of the CJI and the Registry of the Supreme Court is one and the same,” the appeal said and prayed for setting aside the CIC’s order and an interim stay of its operation.

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

National