Nearly four years after the NEET judgment of 2013 was leaked, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has issued a direction of significant implications..It has ordered the Central Public Information Officer of the Supreme Court to disclose what action has been taken on the leakage of NEET judgment. Further, it has also directed disclosure of action taken on complaints made against former CJI Late Altamas Kabir..The direction was issued by Information Commissioner Sridhar Acharyulu in an appeal filed by RTI activist Subhash Chandra Agarwal..Referring to the representation made by one Dr. M Furquan and a statement by Justice VR Krishna Iyer, Agarwal had sought the following information:.(b) copies of complaints received at Union Law Ministry against retired Chief Justice of India Mr Justice Altamas Kabir, including one dated 25.5.20`13 by Mr Justice (Rtd) V R Krishna Iyer, and complaint by Dr M Furquan as forwarded from President’s Secretariat to Union Law Ministry as referred in news report..c) action taken related to probe into leakage of SC verdict dated 18.7.2013 in matter “Christian Medical College, Vellore & others v Union of India”, on a private website several hours before its pronouncement in the court, which was also brought before Hon’ble Chief Justice of India Mr. Justice P Sathasivam as per news report dated 23.7.2013..d) remedial action taken to counter SC verdict dated 18.7.2013.There was a huge delay in response by CPIO. While RTI was dated July 24, 2013, the reply was on 19th December 2013, in which the CPIO stated that the complaints received against judges of Supreme Court and High Courts are forwarded by the Government to the Supreme Court or the concerned High Courts, and that the Central Government does not maintain records of such complaints nor does it monitor action taken on them. He added further that the Government has moved the “Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill”, to provide for a comprehensive mechanism for handling complaints against judges. The appellant filed first appeal and the Appellate Authority stated that the CPIO has given the information based on available office records and hence disposed of the appeal..This led to an appeal before the CIC. The CIC after hearing both the parties made some rather strong observations regarding need for transparency with respect to judiciary. It also observed that a comprehensive mechanism need to be put in place to ensure that,.“both answerability and access to information about administration of justice including appointments, securing ethics, enforcing probity, complaints and action on them, to ensure transparency and accountability without compromising the basic constitutional character of the Independence of Judiciary, to be precise, it is not known who will discipline the judges or former judges, CJI or former CJI. Union Ministry of Law and Justice is expected to inform the appellant/citizen and the Commission, what is possible time required to introduce grievance-redressal system in High Courts and Supreme Court.”.It, therefore, proceeded to direct the following:.The Commission, in view of the facts, circumstances and contentions analyzed above, directs Union Ministry of Law and Justice to:.“a) forward the concerned part of RTI application (what action taken on complaints made against former CJI Altamas Kabir and what action was taken on the leakage of judgment before it was pronounced) to the CPIO or appropriate authority in Supreme Court of India within five days from date of receipt of this order, under intimation to the applicant..The Commission directs the CPIO of Supreme Court to inform appellant, the action or follow up, on the representation dated 6.5.2013 of Dr. M. Furquan regarding Shri Justice Altamas Kabir, former CJI, which was forwarded to PPS of Hon’ble CJI on 27.3.2013, on complaints forwarded by Union Ministry of Law and Justice to the apex court, and inform the number of complaints rejected or accepted, without indicating the names or contents, besides providing information on the RTI applications transferred by this public authority.”.The NEET judgment of 2013 had created quite a furore after an article by advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan was published by Bar & Bench before the pronouncement of the judgment. The article correctly predicted the outcome of the case leading to allegations against then Chief Justice Altamas Kabir who had authored the judgment. The relevant portion of the article is extracted below:. Altamas Kabir had passed away in February this year..Read the order below.
Nearly four years after the NEET judgment of 2013 was leaked, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has issued a direction of significant implications..It has ordered the Central Public Information Officer of the Supreme Court to disclose what action has been taken on the leakage of NEET judgment. Further, it has also directed disclosure of action taken on complaints made against former CJI Late Altamas Kabir..The direction was issued by Information Commissioner Sridhar Acharyulu in an appeal filed by RTI activist Subhash Chandra Agarwal..Referring to the representation made by one Dr. M Furquan and a statement by Justice VR Krishna Iyer, Agarwal had sought the following information:.(b) copies of complaints received at Union Law Ministry against retired Chief Justice of India Mr Justice Altamas Kabir, including one dated 25.5.20`13 by Mr Justice (Rtd) V R Krishna Iyer, and complaint by Dr M Furquan as forwarded from President’s Secretariat to Union Law Ministry as referred in news report..c) action taken related to probe into leakage of SC verdict dated 18.7.2013 in matter “Christian Medical College, Vellore & others v Union of India”, on a private website several hours before its pronouncement in the court, which was also brought before Hon’ble Chief Justice of India Mr. Justice P Sathasivam as per news report dated 23.7.2013..d) remedial action taken to counter SC verdict dated 18.7.2013.There was a huge delay in response by CPIO. While RTI was dated July 24, 2013, the reply was on 19th December 2013, in which the CPIO stated that the complaints received against judges of Supreme Court and High Courts are forwarded by the Government to the Supreme Court or the concerned High Courts, and that the Central Government does not maintain records of such complaints nor does it monitor action taken on them. He added further that the Government has moved the “Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill”, to provide for a comprehensive mechanism for handling complaints against judges. The appellant filed first appeal and the Appellate Authority stated that the CPIO has given the information based on available office records and hence disposed of the appeal..This led to an appeal before the CIC. The CIC after hearing both the parties made some rather strong observations regarding need for transparency with respect to judiciary. It also observed that a comprehensive mechanism need to be put in place to ensure that,.“both answerability and access to information about administration of justice including appointments, securing ethics, enforcing probity, complaints and action on them, to ensure transparency and accountability without compromising the basic constitutional character of the Independence of Judiciary, to be precise, it is not known who will discipline the judges or former judges, CJI or former CJI. Union Ministry of Law and Justice is expected to inform the appellant/citizen and the Commission, what is possible time required to introduce grievance-redressal system in High Courts and Supreme Court.”.It, therefore, proceeded to direct the following:.The Commission, in view of the facts, circumstances and contentions analyzed above, directs Union Ministry of Law and Justice to:.“a) forward the concerned part of RTI application (what action taken on complaints made against former CJI Altamas Kabir and what action was taken on the leakage of judgment before it was pronounced) to the CPIO or appropriate authority in Supreme Court of India within five days from date of receipt of this order, under intimation to the applicant..The Commission directs the CPIO of Supreme Court to inform appellant, the action or follow up, on the representation dated 6.5.2013 of Dr. M. Furquan regarding Shri Justice Altamas Kabir, former CJI, which was forwarded to PPS of Hon’ble CJI on 27.3.2013, on complaints forwarded by Union Ministry of Law and Justice to the apex court, and inform the number of complaints rejected or accepted, without indicating the names or contents, besides providing information on the RTI applications transferred by this public authority.”.The NEET judgment of 2013 had created quite a furore after an article by advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan was published by Bar & Bench before the pronouncement of the judgment. The article correctly predicted the outcome of the case leading to allegations against then Chief Justice Altamas Kabir who had authored the judgment. The relevant portion of the article is extracted below:. Altamas Kabir had passed away in February this year..Read the order below.
