Jump to content
News Ticker
  • NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
  • shows RTI
  • RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
  • 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
  • The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
  • Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
  • Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
akhilesh yadav

TN:HC denies information on judicial post appointment

Recommended Posts

RTI RAJENDRAN
CHENNAI: Distinguishing between the 'right to information' and the 'right to seek information', the Madras high court has upheld its own officer's refusal to part with information relating to appointment of officers in the court.

 

 

Read at: HC denies information on judicial post appointment - The Times of India

violation of Sec 6(2) of RTI act 2005

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

Court Ruling on RTI Info Sparks debate

 

 

CHENNAI: A Madras High Court Bench has triggered a debate when it interpreted a clear “no” in an RTI statute as “yes”.

 

 

The Bench ruled on Wednesday that any person seeking information under the RTI Act must disclose the reasons why he is asking for the information. Legal experts and RTI activists expressed shock over the ruling as the RTI Act clearly says that the an RTI applicant need not disclose reason.

 

 

Section 6 (2) of the Act reads: “An applicant making request for information shall not be required to give any reason for requesting the information….”

 

 

Read more at: Court Ruling on RTI Info Sparks debate - The New Indian Express

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC

 

 

In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate.

A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists.

“If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information,” the bench said.

However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information “shall not” be required to give any reason for requesting the information.

The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act.

“We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities,” it said.

Terming the order “illegal”, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against “letter and spirit” of the Act.

“It’s a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court,” he told PTI.

RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so.

Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason.

 

Read More: Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC - The Hindu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jps50

Hon'ble Madras High Court has decided that reasons should be given for RTI in its judgement dated 17-09-2014. It is being discussed in media also, since it will have serious implications on RTI. It will give discretionary powers to reject to PIO/FAA/ICs based on quality of reasons. Please refer

 

RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information: Madras HC | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

 

Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC - The Hindu

 

Madras HC order seeking reason for RTI plea ‘illegal’, say experts | The Indian Express

 

Experts decry Madras HC order on RTI applications - The Times of India

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

RTI applicants must give basic reasons for seeking information : Madras High Court

 

 

A Madras High Court Division Bench comprising of Justice N. Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice K. Ravichandrababu has ruled that RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate. The decision is being termed as going against the fundamental tenet of RTI regime and may have far reaching consequences on getting information under the RTI Act.

 

The Bench observed, “In fact, a perusal of the pleadings, more particularly, the application made by the second respondent as well as the counter affidavit filed in this Writ Petition, would show that the second respondent has not disclosed even the basic reason for seeking those informations. On the other hand, he has made those applications mechanically, as a matter of routine under the RTI Act.”

 

Justifying its action, the Court added, “In fact, the first respondent-Commission itself has deprecated the practice of the second respondent herein in overloading the Registry of this Court by making several queries or complaints one after another and following the same under the RTI Act. Having found that the action of the second respondent in sending numerous complaints and representations and then following the same with the RTI applications; that it cannot be the way to redress his grievance; that he cannot overload a public authority and divert its resources disproportionately while seeking information and that the dispensation of information should not occupy the majority of time and resource of any public authority, as it would be against the larger public interest, the first respondent-Commission clearly erred in passing the impugned order in this Writ Petition, directing the petitioner to furnish the details to the second respondent as well as sending a tabular statement listing all the complaints and representations received from the second respondent.”

According to leading academician on the subject, Mr. Shamnad Basheer, “This goes against a fundamental tenet of the RTI regime, which is that in a well functioning democracy, all publicly held information is potentially of interest to every citizen. As such, they are not required to give reasons for why they wish to access this public information. This tenet is also expressly articulated in Article 6(2). The court all but ignored this important statutory provision! But on a larger level, this ruling presents a worrying trend, and adds to a long line of cases, where the judiciary appears to have has one set of norms for others (such as the executive) and a convenient one for itself, where it seeks to shield information pertaining to allegedly errant judges. Given that the legitimacy of the judiciary often draws from public reasoning (as articulated in judicial decisions), this decision leaves a deep dent in public perception. I hope the appellate court will reverse and restore our confidence in the judiciary as a just institution.”

 

RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgment strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since it is tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so. Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason. He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition.

 

“There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right,” he said.

 

The Writ Petition revolved around the object and scope of the RTI Act, 2005 as well as the right of the respondent to seek certain information from the High Court and the entitlement of the petitioner to with-hold certain information, out of all the information sought for by the respondent, on the ground that they are not permissible to be disclosed.The Public Information Officer (Registrar (Administration), High Court, Madras had filed the Petition, challenging the order passed by the Central Information Commission, New Delhi, dated 23.1.2013, whereby the petitioner was directed to furnish the information concerning six appeals. With respect to 47 complaints, the petitioner was directed to send statement of particulars regarding the same.

 

Read More: RTI applicants must give basic reasons for seeking information : Madras High Court [Read the Judgment] | Live Law

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

[h=1]आरटीआई पर आफत[/h]आरटीआई (राइट टु इन्फर्मेशन) आवेदनों के साथ कारण बताने की शर्त जोड़ने वाला मद्रास हाई कोर्ट का फैसला चौंकाता है। कोर्ट ने एक मामले की सुनवाई करते हुए कहा कि आरटीआई के तहत कोई सूचना मांगते वक्त आवेदक को उसका ऐसा कारण बताना पड़ेगा, जो कानूनी तौर पर उचित हो।

अक्बटूर 2005 में आरटीआई कानून लागू होने के बाद से देश में इसका इस्तेमाल इस कदर बढ़ गया है कि हर शहर, हर कस्बे में आरटीआई ऐक्टिविस्ट नजर आने लगे हैं। इसके साथ ही इन आरटीआई ऐक्टिविस्टों का तीखा विरोध भी देखने में आया। कई आरटीआई ऐक्टिविस्टों की हत्या हो चुकी है।

इन सबका साफ मतलब यह है कि इस कानून ने समाज में शासन तंत्र को पारदर्शी बनाने की पक्षधर और विरोधी ताकतों के बीच रस्साकशी तेज कर दी है। इसमें दो राय नहीं कि आरटीआई कानून का दुरुपयोग किए जाने की शिकायतें भी मिली हैं। फिर भी कुल मिलाकर एक छोटी सी अवधि में ही इस कानून ने समाज को ज्यादा लोकतांत्रिक बनाने की दिशा में अहम योगदान किया है।

read at: ?????? ?? ??? - Navbharat Times

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

[h=1]‘Challenge Madras court’s RTI order in SC’[/h]

[h=1][/h]Activists say ruling ignores key section of ground-breaking law and infringes on constitutional rights.

Several Right to Information (RTI) experts have criticised a recent decision of the Madras High Court, which passed an order stating that applicants must cite reasons while seeking information under the RTI Act. The experts have said the order goes against the spirit of the ground-breaking Act and infringes on a citizen's constitutional rights.

RTI activist Krishnaraj Rao added that the Madras court's order should be challenged in the Supreme Court. He said it ignores Section 6(2) of the RTI Act, which specifies that an information seeker shall not be required to give reasons.

 

Read at: ?Challenge Madras court?s RTI order in SC? - Mumbai Mirror

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

[h=1]High Court order to cite reasons for seeking information irks RTI activists[/h]

NEW DELHI: A Madras high court ruling last week saying a Right to Information (RTI) applicant must cite reasons for seeking information has been denounced by activists who said the law has no such requirement and that the order can be misused by public authorities to turn down requests.

 

 

The court last Wednesday ruled that any person who seeks information under the RTI Act must show it is ..

 

 

 

 

Read more at: High Court order to cite reasons for seeking information irks RTI activists - The Economic Times

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

Madrash High Court Rectifies its Own Order on RTI

 

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Tuesday rectified a portion its own order of September 18 in which it had said the person who seeks information under Right to Information (RTI) should state the reason for doing so."An applicant making a request for information shall not be required to give any reason for requesting the information or any other personal details except those that may be necessary for contacting him," the bench, comprising Justices N Paul Vasanthakumar and K Ravichandrababu, said.

 

 

Read at: Madrash High Court Rectifies its Own Order on RTI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

[h=1]Court does U-turn on RTI petitioners stating reasons[/h][h=1][/h]CHENNAI: In a rare and bold move, the Madras high court suo motu reviewed and corrected its own order dated September 17 it which it observed that an applicant seeking information under the RTI Act should state reasons for doing so.

 

 

A division bench of Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice K Ravichandrabaabu said the general observations in the earlier order — stating that an RTI application "should contain minimum details or reasons for which information is sought for" — were made without noticing Section 6(2) of the RTI Act, 2005. The provision specifically says an applicant need not give any reason for an RTI p

 

Read at: Court does U-turn on RTI petitioners stating reasons - The Times of India

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

Madras High Court takes up suo motu review of RTI judgment; Says observations were made without noticing S. 6(2) of RTI Act

 

 

Read at: Page not found | Bar and Bench

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • karira
      By karira
      As reported by IANS in sify.com on 21 January 2011:
      RTI Awards presented in Delhi
       
      RTI Awards presented in Delhi
       
      New Delhi, Jan 20 (IANS) From a sports teacher to widow of a slain cop, five people from various walks of life were felicitated here Thursday for effective use of the Right to Information Act.
       
      The winners, including Vinita Kamte, widow of Mumbai Police officer Ashok Kamte who was killed in the Nov 26, 2008 Mumbai terrorist attack, were shortlisted from 726 applications received by the jury appointed by non-governmental organisation Public Cause Research Foundation, set up by RTI activist Arvind Kejriwal.
       
      The jury included Infosys chief mentor N.R. Narayana Murthy, former chief justice of India J.S. Verma, former chief election commissioner J.M. Lyngdoh and journalist Madhu Trehan.
       
      Manoj Kumar Karwasra, a sports teacher in Hisar district of Haryana, filed several RTI applications to expose how government land had been encroached by the panchayat members themselves.
       
      'I have great feeling now. It will boost my morale,' Karwasra told IANS.
       
      Mahiti Adhikar Gujarat Pahel, a helpline service for RTI queries which was launched in May 2006 and claims that it has received more than 60,000 calls till now, was one of the winners.
       
      Sadhna Pandya, coordinator of helpline, said the award will increase their responsibility.
       
      'We receive calls from across the country in various languages,' she said.
       
      Athar Shamsi, an advocate from Faizabad in Uttar Pradesh, was also honoured for fighting for the rights of the beedi workers who were not being paid their full wages by factory owners.
       
      The workers were allegedly paid just Rs.27-34 per thousand beedis made, as against the minimum wage of Rs.60.
       
      The other winners of the Best RTI Citizen award were Ramesh Kumar Verma from Haryana and Rajan Savlo Ghate from Goa. The Best RTI Journalist award went to Saikat Dutta of Outlook for exposing a Rs.2,500 crore-scam in rice exports.
       
      Pradeep Kumar from Bilaspur in Himachal Pradesh received the Best Public Information Officer award.
    • karira
      By karira
      As reported in greaterkashmir.com on 20 January 2011:
      RTI activist attacked in Doda Lastupdate:- Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:30:00 GMT GreaterKashmir.com
       
      RTI activist ‘attacked’ in Doda
       
      Doda, Jan 20: Unidentified persons attacked an Right to Information (RTI) activist at Bhandoga area in Doda district on Monday.
       
      According to locals, Safdar Ali was assaulted by a group of men after he protested against the alleged misappropriation of funds in the construction of a village tank, which collapsed after few days.
       
      “Despite filing of FIR, police has failed to take any substantial action against the culprits,” Safdar Ali said.
       
      “We have documented seven recent attacks on RTI users and activists,” a communiqué issued by JKRTI Movement said adding the activists were facing severe threats from unscrupulous elements.
       
      “The government has a legal and moral responsibility to stop these attacks,” said Haq Nawaz Nehru, a prominent RTI activist.
       
      “We appeal to the Chief Minister, Omar Abdullah and Director General of Police, Kuldeep Khoda to intervene in the matter,” he said.

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy