Jump to content

CIC moved on recruitment procedure of High Court

Recommended Posts


A Supreme Court lawyer has moved the Central Information Commission seeking information on the procedure of the recruitment of class III and IV employees in the Delhi High Court after it was denied by its administration.


Advocate Kamini Jaiswal approached the CIC contending that orders of the High Court Public Information Officer and Chief Public Information Officer (First Appellate Authority) refusing to part away with the information was a violation of the Right to Information Act and also her Fundamental Rights.


She alleged that information had been denied for erroneous reasons and none of the exemption available under Section 8 of the Act allows the authority not to part away with the information sought.


The lawyer had filed the application before the Public Information Officier on September 22, 2006 seeking information regarding number of class III and class IV employees recruited by the Court from the year 1990 to 2006 and the procedure followed for their recruitment.


The High Court PIO while denying the information held that information pertaining to those decisions which were taken administratively or quasi-judicially would be available only to the affected parties.


The lawyer then approached Appellate Authority challenging the PIO order contending that the High Court (Right to information) Rules were inconsistent with the provision of the Right to Information Act and it should be held void.


But the Appellate Authority refused to accept the contention of the lawyer and dismissed her appeal. Now the lawyer has moved Central Information Commission against this order.


CIC moved on recruitment procedure of High Court .:. NewKerala.Com, India News Channel

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the status of this appeal?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very sure that the CIC would have decided against the PIO and FAA.


If someone has concrete details please share it with us.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • ganpat1956
      By ganpat1956
      By David Rose
      Tuesday, 20 February 2007
      An MP has pledged to lead a Commons revolt over a controversial attempt to exempt Parliament from the Freedom of Information Act.
      A private members bill, introduced by former Tory chief whip David Maclean, would, if it becomes law, prevent journalists and others from using FoI requests to obtain information contained in MPs' correspondence with government departments and other public bodies.
      But Norman Baker, the Liberal Democrat MP for Lewes, has vowed to oppose the bill when it comes before the Commons for its crucial Report Stage and Third Reading on 20 April.
      Maclean's Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill has already been given an unopposed Second Reading and has been approved by 19-member committee drawn from MPs in all parties.
      Opponents can attempt to block Private Members Bills at the Report Stage using filibustering tactics. To prevent Baker and other critics from talking out the two-clause bill, Maclean may be forced to muster 100 MPs in order to force a closure vote and secure the Commons' approval to be sent to the House of Lords.
      Maclean has been impressed by the amount of support he has secured. Among the MPs who spoke up for the Bill in committee were Labour MPs George Howarth (Knowsley North and Sefton) Kevan Jones, (North Durham) and Fraser Kemp (Houghton and Washington East).
      Liberal Democrat MP Nick Harvey (North Devon) also raised no objection.
      Harvey, chairman of the House of Commons Commission, told MPs: "Requests under the FoI Act are becoming increasingly intrusive, particularly on issues such as t he additional costs allowance. In that respect, they are getting into very personal realms - they are going behind the front door into Members' homes."
      While the Government insists the Bill must be decided on a free vote, Tony Wright, Labour chairman of the Commons Public Administration Committee, has accused the whips of collaborating to ensure the Bill gets approved.
      Constitutional Affairs minister Bridget Prentice has also indicated where her own sympathies lie.
      "We should not allow the 2000 Act to disrupt the vital relationship between and MP and his or her constituents, and the time has come to address the issue," she told MPs.
      Baker told Press Gazette: "The Government is backtracking on the FoI Act.
      "This is a throw back to the 1950s when Parliament was a private members' club.
      "If this is passed we will have the absurd position of exempting from the legislation those people who passed the law."
      Baker recently won a case before the Information Tribunal which forced the disclosure of more details of MPs' travel expenses.
      Press Gazette - UK Journalism News and Journalism Jobs
    • ganpat1956
      By ganpat1956
      Bangalore, February 23, 2007
      The wait is certainly agonizing for Vaishanavi Kasturi, a visually impaired student, as she knocks on the doors of the Indian Institute of Management-Bangalore to know why she could not make it despite her excellent performance in CAT 2006.
      On Friday, Vaishanavi’s father RK Kasturi spent several hours closeted with a team of officials from IIM-B, asking them why his daughter was not called for a group discussion and personal interview. Vaishanavi cleared the CAT with a percentile of 89.29, outdoing thousands of other candidates. She was certainly eligible to sit for the next round of tests — the group discussion and interview — what with the IIM-B setting a cut-off of 86.42 percentile for the disabled. But the call never came.
      Disappointed, Vaishanavi’s family filed a notice under the Right to Information Act, which got Kasturi the meeting with the school authorities.
      At the end of the discussion, Kasturi still did not have an answer for his daughter. He told the Hindustan Times: “They told us that she did not make it because others (in the category of applicants with physical disabilities) were graduates or had work experience, etc. We had a long meeting and discussed many things because we want to understand where we stand. Let us wait till Monday (February 26). We have to attend a hearing at the RTI Commissioner’s office that day. The group discussions and interviews are scheduled for April. Let us see what happens on Monday.”
      For Vaishnavi — a sixth semester BCom student of a local college — the doors to IIM-B may not have opened for her but another prestigious institute, the MS Ramaiah Institute of Management, has offered her a free seat for a post-graduate diploma in management.
      Vaishanavi, however, still hopes she will qualify for the Indian Institute of Management-Bangalore at the end of the hearing at the RTI Commissioner’s office in the state capital on Monday.
      IIM says no to top scorer : HindustanTimes.com


  • Create New...

Important Information

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