Disclosure Debate: Apex Court stays CIC directive

Bar&Bench News Network

Dec 04, 2009

The Supreme Court has stayed the implementation of the Chief Information Commissioner's (CIC) directive asking it to divulge details relating to the appointment of judges as well as the correspondence between the Chief Justice of India and Justice R. Regupathy of the Madras High Court on the alleged interference of a Union minister in a sub judice matter.

A Bench comprising Justices B Sudershan Reddy and Deepak Verma has sought reply within three weeks and granted another two weeks for filing of rejoinder.

The Attorney General G E Vahanvati, along with Advocate Devadatt Kamat, had sought a stay on the CIC's direction, saying the matter involved several important questions of law which required urgent hearing. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for RTI applicant S.C. Agarwal, was present in the court when the matter came up, a PTI report stated.

Interestingly, the two appeals have been filed by the Supreme Court directly to itself rather than to the Delhi High Court, contrary to well established precedence.

 

Paginate
Add to My Clips Print this Story Email this Story

 

Facebook LinkedIn MySpace Digg Del.icio.us twitter

Comments(2)
  • 1. "Supreme Court office also under the public authority. so, information to be given to the public for transparency of information which are vital to contain corruption and to hold Governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed;". Mayihelpyouonline Dot Com, Lucknow
  • 2. "The interference of the Apex Court in the matter of the transparency which the Information Commissions insisting on as their duties under the existing law, is nothing but the power game.Apex Court and the Information Commissions have locked horns.Jurisdictions of the CIC is being defined by the Courts. What and where is the harm if the information relating to the procedure for selecting the judges is disclosed to the citizens? There are more important works lying before the Apex Court to do i.e dispose of the cases , supervising the disposal of the cases in lower courts, administration of justice etc. and hence leaving those apart, interference in to the power and functions of the CIC to thwart its attempt to make some procedure public will perhaps not be justified. Miscarriage of justice has to be stopped. If it is intentional to block some process then it is unjust and amounts to corrupt practice. ". Ziaur Rahman, Kolkata
Post Your Comment

Name* :

Location :

Email Id :

Comment * :

Notify me when there is a comment


 

Thank you. Comments are subject to moderation.