The Central Information Commission (CIC) in the third week of May 2011 overturned its own decision and ruled that the Supreme Court cannot refuse information on judicial matters if an applicant has asked for it under the Right to Information Act.
At present, information disclosure related to a person’s own case could be applied to the Supreme Court under the RTI act. However, in case of a third party, the Supreme Court ruled that application must be made under court rules. According to Rule 2 of the Supreme Court, the applicant must establish good cause before the court if he wants information regarding any case. But CIC objected to that by saying it goes against the RTI act.
Information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi gave the order stating that all citizens have the right to access information under Section 3 of the Right to Information Act.
The decision came after a resident of Gurgaon, R S Mishra had asked for information related to letters he had written to the Supreme Court. The apex court had denied the information.
At present, information disclosure related to a person’s own case could be applied to the Supreme Court under the RTI act. However, in case of a third party, the Supreme Court ruled that application must be made under court rules. According to Rule 2 of the Supreme Court, the applicant must establish good cause before the court if he wants information regarding any case. But CIC objected to that by saying it goes against the RTI act.
Information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi gave the order stating that all citizens have the right to access information under Section 3 of the Right to Information Act.
The decision came after a resident of Gurgaon, R S Mishra had asked for information related to letters he had written to the Supreme Court. The apex court had denied the information.
Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that substantially aided clubs, aided schools and cooperative bodies, including sugar mills, house building societies and banks, are covered under the Right to Information Act.
