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
ganpat1956

CIC bouncers in court

Recommended Posts

ganpat1956

The Union government has taken refuge before the judiciary to avoid parting with the information sought under the RTI Act in some cases, claiming that they were "classified" and would be a "threat to national security."

Hit by the bouncers from the Central Information Commission (CIC), the Union government-- which initiated the Right To Information Act -- has taken refuge before the judiciary to avoid parting with the information sought under the RTI Act in some cases, claiming that they were “classified” and would be a “threat to national security.”

 

The Centre has moved the Delhi high court challenging the CIC order in at least three cases: Appointments of chief justice of Punjab and Haryana high court Vijender Jain, Shiv Shanker Menon as foreign secretary and the UPSC civil services examination.

 

Asked about these cases, a commissioner with the CIC on condition of anonymity said, ''CIC is a toothless tiger. It can only pass an order but it is up to the government to provide the information.''

 

Challenging the CIC order in Jain’s appointment, the government said, ''The impugned order is contrary to the provision of 8 (1)(e) of the RTI Act. There is no obligation to disclose information available to a person in the fidicious relationship.

 

In the instant case, the views expressed by the Judges or persons under consideration for being appointed as judges clearly creates a judiciary relationship between the Supreme Court collegium and such judges or person.''

 

The government maintained that under Article 217 of the Constitution, the records of the collegium of the Supreme Court, made to the Ministry of Law and Justice; and subsequently to the Prime Minister and President would be in the nature of advice tendered by the cabinet to the President and, hence, being privileged, cannot be disclosed.

 

In May 2007, the high court stayed the CIC's order directing the Union to produce all relevant documents pertaining to the appointment of Mr Menon as foreign secretary. The Centre submitted that the information sought did not come within the ambit of the RTI Act.

 

“The documents are not liable to be disclosed in any form or manner either to Ms Veena Sikri, a 1971 batch IFS officer (who had challenged Menon’s appointment), or before any other person or authority including the CIC.”

 

The CIC by its May 7 order had also directed the External Affairs Ministry to allow Ms Sikri to make inspection within 15 days of a file on Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) in connection with the promotion to the foreign secretary. Ms Sikri had moved the CIC complaining of gender bias in the selection to the key post. Menon had superseded 16 officers including her to become the foreign secretary.

 

UPSC exam

 

In another similar case, the government appearing on behalf of the UPSC told the high court that the information sought by about 2,500 IAS aspirants such as cut-off marks, individual scores scaling criteria and model answers were top secret and disclosure of such "crucial" documents would lead to violation of intellectual property.

 

''Revealing of the marks would infringe intellectual property right of the commission. The coaching institutes might decipher short-cut methods to the advantage of its students,'' said the UPSC. Many meritorious students might be at disadvantage if the marks, cut-off points and the scaling system were revealed, it contended.

 

Deccan Herald - CIC bouncers in court

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
colnrkurup

From thebeginning the above cases, I had maintained theview expressed byu High Cout. Ihese are rare occasions whereI appreciate the judiciary.In Sikri's Case, everyone including she herself knew that appointments to critial posts like Foreign Secretaey cannot be done purely becuase one has joined the service earlier. It has tobe selected from a group of eligible contestents. His way of thinking and deplomacy should be in tune wih that of government's foreign policy. How can one tolerate Mrs.Sikri as our Foreign Secretary who rush to pillar to post in a most undeplomatic manner as our chief of deplomates when she is fully aware of the selection pattern. .

Similarly, I fully agree with the contentions and justifications of the court in UPSC case also..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sidmis

Wait for HC order on cut-off marks: CIC tells IAS aspirant

 

as reported in Chennai Online

 

New Delhi, Aug 26 An Indian Administrative Services (IAS) aspirant, seeking information on cut-off marks in the UPSC examination, was told by the Central Information Commission (CIC) to wait till the Delhi High Court passes its verdict on the issue.

 

"On the question of cut-off marks, RTI applicant Vivek Tripathi will have to await the decision of the Delhi High Court which is expected to be announced on November three," Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah said.

 

The transparency panel, however, refused to re-examine its decision given earlier in which it held that a citizen cannot seek disclosure of the evaluated answer sheets under the RTI Act.

 

Tripathi, a resident of Jhabua (Madhya Pradesh), approached the CIC, seeking information regarding Civil Service Main Examination held in 2005 and asked it to direct the UPSC to show him the answer sheet of English paper.

 

He contended that the UPSC had provided him incomplete information but the Counsel for the Commission, Naresh Kaushik, refuted the allegations.

 

Kaushik submitted that the applicant was being replied in accordance with the spirit of the RTI Act.

 

"The UPSC does not maintain question-wise marks but has provided the marks, the record of which is being maintained by the public authority," he said. (Agencies)

 

Published: Tuesday, August 26, 2008

 

Wait for HC order on cut-off marks: CIC tells IAS aspirant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • crusader
      By crusader
      I want to know that I have got information from Nagar nigam, Can I use it as an evidence in the court of law? What are the provisions related to that?
    • Shrawan
      By Shrawan
      Central Information Commission


       
       

      Decision No.292/IC(A)/2006
      F. No.CIC/MA/A/2006/00588


       

      Dated, the 21st September, 2006


       
       

      Name of the Appellant : Sh. Sharabh Dubey, 11/7 Civil Lines, Kanpur –208 001. (U.P.)
      Name of the Public Authority: The British India Corporation Limited, 14/136 Civil Lines, P.B. 77, Kanpur-208 001.
      DECISION
       
      Facts of the Case:
       

      The appellant is an employee of the respondent. He was transferred to another Unit of the company. The office order was challenged by him in the Court, which adjudicated on the matter. Subsequently, he has filed a few more petitions on service related matters in the Court. In this backdrop, he has sought documents relating to the legal opinion obtained by the respondent, file notings by the senior officials on the issue of transfer, letters/correspondence with other officials, etc.
      The CPIO has denied the information and sought exemption u/s 8(1)(d) & (g) of the Act.
      The case was heard on 12.9.06. The appellant could not be present. The CPIO and the appellate authority were present. In the course of hearing, the CPIO showed a copy of the petition filed by the appellant in the Court, whic hcontained almost all the documents asked for by him. The CPIO contended that the documents asked for by the appellant relate to the various petitions filed by him in the Court. He, therefore, pleaded that the disclosure of the documents might adversely affect the disputed cases. Hence, the relevant documents are treated as confidential.
       
      Commission’s Decision:
       

      There is a dispute between the appellant and the company on service matters, including transfer of the appellant to another unit. The matter is pending before the Court for adjudication. There is every possibility that the appellant would get opportunity for his effective defense. The information sought is in the interest of the seeker. And, as such, there is no overriding public interest, u/s 8(1)(j) of the Act, for disclosure of the information.
      The appeal is therefore dismissed.
       

      Sd/-
      (Prof. M.M. Ansari)
      Information Commissioner


Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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