The Hindu : Front Page : CJI comes under RTI Act: Delhi High Court

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Jan 13, 2010
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

Front Page

Front Page

CJI comes under RTI Act: Delhi High Court

J. Venkatesan and Nirnimesh Kumar

Single judge order proper and valid, it says

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has held that the office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) is a “public authority” that comes within the ambit of the Right to Information (RTI) Act and it is bound to provide information about the declaration of asset details by Supreme Court judges.

A Bench of the High Court, comprising Chief Justice A.P. Shah and Justices Vikramjit Sen and S. Muralidhar, on Tuesday upheld the judgment of a single judge and dismissed an appeal filed by the Secretary-General of the Supreme Court.

Soon after the ruling, Atul Nanda, counsel for the appellant, made a request for grant of a certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 134 A of the Constitution. The Bench granted the certificate to file an appeal as important questions of law were involved in this case.

On September 2, 2009, the single judge dismissed an appeal from the Chief Public Information Officer (CPIO) against an order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) asking the Supreme Court Registry to furnish to RTI activist Subash Chandra Agarwal information in the CJI’s possession on the judges’ assets.

“We are satisfied that the impugned order of the single Judge is both proper and valid and needs no interference,” the High Court Bench said, rejecting the submissions of Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati, who contended: “We cannot expose our judges to public scrutiny or inquiry because it would hamper their functioning and independence.”

Writing the 88-page judgment, Justice Shah said:

“The CJI cannot be a fiduciary vis-À-vis judges of the Supreme Court. The Judges of the Supreme Court hold independent office, and there is no hierarchy, in their judicial functions, which places them on a plane different than the CJI.

“The declarations are not furnished to the CJI in a private relationship or as a trust, but in discharge of the constitutional obligation to maintain higher standards and probity of judicial life and are in the larger public interest.

“In these circumstances, it cannot be held that the asset information shared with the CJI, by the judges of the Supreme Court, is held by him in the capacity of fiduciary, which if directed to be revealed, would result in a breach of such duty.”

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

Front Page