Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'delhi high court'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Request for Community Support
  • Connect with Community
  • Learn about RTI
  • Website News & Support
  • Read RTI News & Stories
  • RTI Act Critics's RTI Act Critics Topics
  • Fans of RTI India's Fans of RTI India Topics
  • Insurance Consumer's Insurance Consumer Topics
  • Activists of Transparency and Accountability's Activists of Transparency and Accountability Topics
  • Issues with BWSSB's Issues with BWSSB Topics
  • Law+Order-Bangalore-32's Law+Order-Bangalore-32 Topics
  • Issues With Electricity Board's Issues With Electricity Board Topics
  • RTI Activists's RTI Activists Topics
  • YOGA's YOGA Topics
  • help each other's help each other Topics
  • forest and wild life's forest and wild life Topics
  • Indian Police Officials not following Cr.P.C.'s Indian Police Officials not following Cr.P.C. Topics
  • RTI Activist+Politics's RTI Activist+Politics Topics
  • hostels and lodging places's hostels and lodging places Topics
  • RTI Activists in Rajasthan.'s RTI Activists in Rajasthan. Topics
  • RTI info warriors in Haryana's RTI info warriors in Haryana Topics
  • DisABILITY Rights and RTI's DisABILITY Rights and RTI Topics
  • Govt Servant, Local Bodies or PSU Employees using RTI.'s Govt Servant, Local Bodies or PSU Employees using RTI. Topics
  • Eco club's Eco club Topics
  • Self Employment in Sport's Self Employment in Sport Topics
  • RTI related to land issue's RTI related to land issue Topics
  • Open SourceTechnology support to RTI's Open SourceTechnology support to RTI Topics
  • TRAP group's TRAP group Topics
  • Odisha RTI Activists's Odisha RTI Activists Topics
  • right to information activists's right to information activists Topics
  • Mumbai's Mumbai Topics
  • Chartered Accountants's Chartered Accountants Topics
  • ngosamachar's ngosamachar Topics
  • Growing INDIA's Growing INDIA Topics
  • we are all friends.'s we are all friends. Topics
  • RTI for Government employees's RTI for Government employees Topics
  • Dhanus - Pending Salaries's Dhanus - Pending Salaries Topics
  • Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessors's Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessors Topics
  • Mahamumbai's Mahamumbai Topics
  • M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech's M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech Topics
  • Corruption's Corruption Topics
  • minority engineering colleges in maharashtra's minority engineering colleges in maharashtra Topics
  • RiGhTs's RiGhTs Topics
  • ram's ram Topics
  • anti corrupt police's anti corrupt police Topics
  • Save Girl in Punjab's Save Girl in Punjab Topics
  • Rent Apartment in US's Rent Apartment in US Topics
  • RTI Kerala's RTI Kerala Topics
  • maharashtra's maharashtra Topics
  • Right Way Of India(RTI)'s Right Way Of India(RTI) Topics
  • Whistle- Blowers against corrupt India's Whistle- Blowers against corrupt India Topics
  • Navi Mumbai's Navi Mumbai Topics
  • electricity curruption in up's electricity curruption in up Topics
  • SHARE n STOCKS trading's SHARE n STOCKS trading Topics
  • Civil Engineers-CAD's Civil Engineers-CAD Topics
  • Nitin Aggarwal's Nitin Aggarwal Topics
  • ex-serviceman activities's ex-serviceman activities Topics
  • SSCC's SSCC Topics
  • Remove Corrupt Bueraucrates's Remove Corrupt Bueraucrates Topics
  • jharkhand RTI activist group's jharkhand RTI activist group Topics
  • Suhail's Suhail Topics
  • govt.servant's govt.servant Topics
  • RTI Uttar pradesh's RTI Uttar pradesh Topics
  • anti-corruption team's anti-corruption team Topics
  • Manaism's Manaism Topics
  • Insurance's Insurance Topics
  • sonitpur datri sewa samity's sonitpur datri sewa samity Topics
  • indian youth manch's indian youth manch Topics
  • HUDA Co- Operative Group Housing Societies's HUDA Co- Operative Group Housing Societies Topics
  • youth's youth Topics
  • aastha's aastha Topics
  • RTI for Citizens's RTI for Citizens Topics
  • learn always's learn always Topics
  • R.T.I.'s R.T.I. Topics
  • Karnataka Karmika Kalyana Prathishtana's Karnataka Karmika Kalyana Prathishtana Topics
  • Akhil Bhart anti corruption sangathna's Akhil Bhart anti corruption sangathna Topics
  • MBA, business and new entrepreneur.....'s MBA, business and new entrepreneur..... Topics
  • students seeking help's students seeking help Topics
  • RTI Corporate's RTI Corporate Topics
  • Electrical group's Electrical group Topics
  • V4LRights's V4LRights Topics
  • Pirated software in GOvt oofice and sc hool's Pirated software in GOvt oofice and sc hool Topics
  • Gaming's Gaming Topics
  • WE Born to help's WE Born to help Topics
  • help the elderly citizen's help the elderly citizen Topics
  • Ballygunge Government Hogh School Alumni Association's Ballygunge Government Hogh School Alumni Association Topics
  • Corruption free Country's Corruption free Country Topics
  • surajyam's surajyam Topics
  • kanpurvictims's kanpurvictims Topics
  • Railway Group A Services's Railway Group A Services Topics
  • Encroachment of public property by private giants's Encroachment of public property by private giants Topics
  • Case Status - Anti Corruption's Case Status - Anti Corruption Topics
  • Aam Aadmi (The Common Man)'s Aam Aadmi (The Common Man) Topics
  • Court Marriage in Punjab's Court Marriage in Punjab Topics
  • ALL's ALL Topics
  • Youth India Social Group (YISG)'s Youth India Social Group (YISG) Topics
  • ye kya fandda h's ye kya fandda h Topics
  • mindset's mindset Topics
  • anti corruption's anti corruption Topics
  • activism's activism Topics
  • common's common Topics
  • state group's state group Topics
  • social help group's social help group Topics
  • landlords of uttar pradesh's landlords of uttar pradesh Topics
  • Concern Citizens Forum for India's Concern Citizens Forum for India Topics
  • edusystem's edusystem Topics
  • Ratna Jyoti's Ratna Jyoti Topics
  • development in indian village's development in indian village Topics
  • technovision's technovision Topics
  • Mighty India's Mighty India Topics
  • Against Corporate Fraud's Against Corporate Fraud Topics
  • Stop crime's Stop crime Topics
  • NVS - Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti's NVS - Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti Topics
  • Authenticated Public Plateform's Authenticated Public Plateform Topics
  • shalin's shalin Topics
  • terminater's terminater Topics
  • RTI Wind Energy's RTI Wind Energy Topics
  • Go..................?'s Go..................? Topics
  • Co-Op Housing Society's Co-Op Housing Society Topics
  • we are equal's we are equal Topics
  • Phoenix Deals's Phoenix Deals Topics
  • Theft Cases in chandigarh's Theft Cases in chandigarh Topics
  • Economically Weaker Section Certificate & Benifits's Economically Weaker Section Certificate & Benifits Topics
  • Solar Systems's Solar Systems Topics
  • Get aware about ur Education and related rights's Get aware about ur Education and related rights Topics
  • Save Mumbai's Save Mumbai Topics
  • Complaints to MCD & Delhi Jal Board's Complaints to MCD & Delhi Jal Board Topics
  • ashayen's ashayen Topics
  • unemployment's unemployment Topics
  • Employee Solution's Employee Solution Topics
  • is kanpur university against sc/st's is kanpur university against sc/st Topics
  • prayatna's prayatna Topics
  • Parking woes's Parking woes Topics
  • Helping RTI INDIA web development's Helping RTI INDIA web development Topics


  • Uncategorized
  • Section 18 (1)
  • Section 11
  • For Common Man
  • Section 16
  • Section 2(h)
  • Section 8 (1)(j)
  • Simplified RTI
  • Government Employee and RTI
  • RTI Act 2005
  • Success Stories
  • Exempt Organisation
  • DG IT
  • Section 8 (1) (e)
  • Section 2 (h) (d) (i)
  • Supreme Court Decisions
  • Section 2 (j) (i)
  • Section 2
  • Section 8
  • Section 20
  • Section 19
  • SIC Punjab
  • High Court Decisions
  • Section 9
  • Section 24
  • DoPT
  • RTI Awareness
  • Section 6 (3)
  • Section 6
  • Section 2 (f)
  • Opinion
  • Department of Posts
  • Ministry of Railways
  • Departments
  • Ministry of Home Affairs
  • Ministry of Corporate Affairs
  • Ministry of Law & Justice
  • Government of NCT of Delhi
  • Delhi Police
  • Ministry of Human Resource Development
  • Staff Selection Commission
  • Court Decisions
  • CIC Decisions
  • Activism
  • Section 25
  • University
  • Section 7
  • Ministry of Agriculture
  • Section 3
  • RTI Discussions
  • Section 19 (8) (b)
  • Section (1) (d)
  • Section 8 (1) (d)
  • DIrectorate of Education
  • Govt of NCT of Delhi
  • Cooperative Housing Society
  • RTI for School
  • Member RTI
  • Municipal Corporation
  • Ministry of Defence


  • RTI Act


  • News


  • Quotes


  • RTI Videos


  • RTI Directory
  • Important RTI Decisions
  • Other Important Court Decisions
  • Sample RTI
  • Acts & Circulars


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...

Found 18 results

  1. Version 1.0.0


    An Applicant during inspection of the concerned records can be accompanied by his counsel or an authorized representative. If the petitioner, for some reasons, felt inhibited due to his not being fluent in English, denial of appropriate assistance in fact would have resulted in withholding access to information. Surely, that is not the object of the Act or even the order. In these circumstances, the respondents should grant the petitioner's request. Accordingly, the respondent No.1 is directed to permit inspection of the concerned records by the petitioner, who can be accompanied by his counsel or an authorized representative.
  2. There was a ruling by CIC in March 2017,that the pension matters to be treated under life and liberty clause of the rti act 2005. Recently,on a pension matter,I had send a second appeal to CIC quoting this for an immediate decision. The second appeal was filed on 30 sep 2017. even after 2 months,there was no decision by CIC on the matter. I had filed a writ petition at delhi HC against the CIC. However,the court vide the above ruling declined to consider the pension under life and liberty clause. The court had only given a casual direction to CIC to expeditiously settle the issue with out giving any time frame. I am planning to file an appeal before the division bench. I seek the valuable opinions of all in this regard 241272_2017.pdf
  3. Delhi High Court quashes RTI Act, CIC Management Regulations 2007 Nov 27, 2009 – A division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice B.D.Ahmed and Justice Veena Birbal today quashed the Central Information Commission (Management) Regulations 2007 while hearing India's longest running RTI battle the case of Er.Sarbajit Roy v. DDA. All Central RTI appeals will henceforth be heard by all 10 Information Commissions sitting jointly. In 2005 the complainant Er.Sarbajit Roy had moved India's first RTI case to India' FoI watchdog the Central Information Commission (CIC) complaining that the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) had failed to comply with proactive disclosure mandated under new India's Right to Information Act 2005. 4 years later on 22.09.2009 a twin bench of Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah and Information Commissioner M.L.Sharma found Roy's allegations to be true and constituted a 3 member committee to go into all aspect of servicing RTI Act throughout the DDA expeditiously. Roy challenging the appointment of the committee cited the Government of India's legal opinion to CIC for there to be no provision in law for CIC to form benches or committees to decide complaints. The DDA then approached the High Court and obtained a stay against all proceeding in Roy's complaint . The Court heard Er.Roy, standing senior counsel for CIC Prof. K.K.Nigam and standing counsel for DDA Adv. Ajay Verma at length over 2 days. The Court was astounded to learn that the CIC (Management) Regulations 2007 promulgated by CIC which permits setting up of benches and inquiry committees had never been notified in the gazette to have any legal effect. The Court while striking down the Regulations also interpreted section 12 (4) of the RTI Act to be a "provision restricting the CIC's autonomy" and not as an enabling provision to frame notifications. Noting that the Department of Personnel (DOPT) had consistently refused to notify the CIC's wide roving regulations, the Court remarked "what was not done by Rules cannot now enter through the backdoor of these illegal regulations". Responding to the decision Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah said "It is highly impractical to expect the entire bench to hear every case together especially in the state commissions. We have asked them to provide an alternative, a system in place so that their demand could be considered". CPI Politburo leader Brinda Karat also hit out at the government over the Government demand to force CIC to only sit as a Full Bench in Parliament. "Who is the DoPT to make such demands, the CIC is an independent body. The government has no business getting involved in this." There are now concerns that attempts by the government to restrict the role of the CIC will lead to a massive delay in disposing cases. Already 26,000 cases are awaiting hearing at CIC with an 18 month backlog. The wait has just got longer. Delhi High Court Infowire, an online website for advocates reporting daily hearings from Delhi High Court contributed by advocates who appeared Source: http://www.prlog.org/10429934-delhi-high-court-quashes-rti-actcic-management-regulations-2007.html
  4. As reported by Vimal Kumar at indiancooperative.com on 20 February 2011 Country’s courts have become store house of many itigation cases where Cooperatives argue that they can not be covered under the act. Several cooperatives, including the National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Ltd (Nafed), Krishak Bharati Cooperative Ltd (Kribhco) and National Cooperative Consumers’ Federation of India Ltd (NCCF), maintain the RTI Act is in contravention of cooperative principles. RTI cases involving, Kribhco, Nafed and NCCF are set to be heard on 17 March in the Delhi high court. According to cooperative sources government equity in grassroots agriculture cooperatives is 4.39%, and is less than 10% in the entire sector and thus they should be free of RTI prying eyes.
  5. Court cannot frame rules for appointment of CIC chief: HC as reported in MSN, New Delhi, Oct 22 (PTI) The Delhi High Court has refused to frame guidelines for appointment of Chief Information Commissioner saying it cannot "restrict" the discretionary power of a committee headed by the Prime Minister to decide a suitable person for the post. "We cannot restrict the discretionary power of the high- powered committee headed by the Prime Minister to decide on the appointment of the Chief Information Commissioner," a bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Manmohan said. The Chief Information Commissioner is chosen by a committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and a minister of the Union Cabinet. The court dismissed the plea of RTI activist Arvind Kejriwal who sought the court''s intervention in framing rules for the appointment of Chief Information Commissioner and other members of the Commission. He alleged there was manipulation by the Department of Personnel and Training, which recommends the name for the post to the committee, in the appointment Information Commissioner A N Tiwari as the CIC chief. The court, however, refused to entertain the plea and dismissed it, saying "we cannot legislate of frame rules". PTI AAC Court cannot frame rules for appointment of CIC chief: HC -
  6. HC orders compensation for not providing info under RTI Act as reported in Yahoo! News Oct 1 2010 New Delhi, Oct 1 (PTI) The Delhi High Court has asked the Public Information Officer of Directorate of Delhi Health Service(DHS) to pay Rs 50,000 as compensation to a poor man for not providing information pertaining to his treatment in a hospital within the stipulated time under RTI Act. Justice S Muralidhar upheld Central Information Commission''s(CIC) August 20 order and dismissed an appeal filed by DHS challenging the compensation awarded by the CIC. ". Any delay in providing timely information can result in a person belonging to the Economic Weaker Section (EWS) having to needlessly spend valuable resources for medical treatment which should otherwise be available to such person free of cost. The present case is an indicator of why many belonging to the EWS category are unable to avail of freeship facility in the hospitals in Delhi," the court said. Puran Chand, a Below Poverty Line(BPL) card holder, was undergoing treatment for a serious disease of compression of the spine in Indian Spinal Injury Center(ISIC), run by Delhi government, and sought freeship facility in August last year. However, he was given a bill of Rs 1.75 lakh for the treatment, after which he filed an application under RTI Act for the detailed information. The PIO of DHS had failed to provide information on time and as a result he had to undergo surgery in a private hospital in September last year. Source : HC orders compensation for not providing info under RTI Act - Yahoo! India News
  7. Remove debris near Neela Hauz flyover in 2 months: High court tells PWD as reported by Sri Abhinav Garg, TNN, Aug 22, 2010 NEW DELHI: Unhappy that construction-related debris is still lying near the recently inaugurated Neela Hauz flyover that straddles a medieval era lake, the Delhi high court has given a two-month deadline to the Public Works Department (PWD) to clean up the place. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Manmohan recently expressed their displeasure with the civic agency for failing to enforce a clause in the contract with the private firm that built the flyover, namely its obligation to remove all debris that threatens the very existence of the Neela Hauz lake. HC was alerted to PWD's failure to remove debris by petitioner Malvika Kaul, a resident of Vasant Kunj who has filed a PIL alleging government indifference towards the endangered waterbody. Kaul, appearing through her lawyer Bankey Bihari accused the PWD of forgetting its responsibility to ensure debris removal, pointing out how this construction waste imperilled the lake's existence. The judges also demanded an answer from the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), which has been made the nodal agency incharge of overall restoration of the lake, by a committee of Delhi government officials. DDA's mandate is to ensure the lake is fully restored to its original glory since the flyover over it has now been opened to the public. Kaul's PIL raised concern over ecological imbalance caused by construction of the flyover across the lake and relies upon information collated from RTI replies directed at PWD that showed no environment impact study was done to take into account ecological damage to the waterbody prior to construction of the flyover. "Preserving this lake is important because it is the only source of natural recharge to ground water in Vasant Kunj. The water level in this area is already very low with a spurt of constructions including malls and housing complexes on the ridge land surrounding Vasant Kunj. These constructions will keep on depleting the underground water unless lakes like Neela Hauz are fiercely protected,'' the PIL contended, seeking HC's intervention. The petition accused the government of violating rulings of the Supreme Court and its concept of "sustainable development'' by ignoring environmental concerns, seeking to commit the government to restore and preserve Neela Hauz. Lastly, the PIL stresses that the Neela Hauz alongwith the adjoining Sanjay Van form a distinct ecological unit and house a variety of life ranging from the aquatic to the migratory birds. Remove debris near Neela Hauz flyover in 2 months: High court tells PWD - Delhi - City - The Times of India
  8. You will perhaps not believe it but recently Delhi High Court has imposed fine of Rs. 22,500/= on CPIO in CVC for 90 days delay in providing the information to an applicant under RTI Act. Read the judgement. In addition to the above, CVC as respondent, has been ordered to pay Rs. 30,000/= as compensation to the petitioner who had to approach the High Court to seek justice against the delay in providing information by CVC. High Court has imposed the fine itself as it agreed with the petitioner that if the matter again goes to the CIC only for the purpose of determining what should be the penalty and the compensation payble by the CVC, it would needlessly delay the matter further. This is a very interesting case. By reading the judgement you will see how IOCL, CVO, CVC and unintentionally CIC have acted chor-chor mausere bhai.
  9. HC rejects ex-RAW official’s plea for info under RTI As reported in Indian Express, Fri Jul 02 2010 The Delhi High Court today turned down the plea of a retired Director of Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) seeking direction to the agency to disclose information under the RTI Act. Justice S Muralidhar dismissed the plea of Brig (Retd) Ujjal Dasgupta, a former official of the intelligence agency, who was arrested for allegedly leaking sensitive information to a CIA agent. The court passed the order on a petition of Dasgupta filed against the Centre for not disclosing information about the software ‘Anveshak’ which was crucial to his defence in the espionage case filed against him. Dasgupta, former Director (Computers), RAW, was arrested in 2006 for allegedly violating the Official Secrets Act by passing on sensitive information to an American diplomat Rosanna Minchew. Under the RTI Act, Dasgupta had sought details about the development of ‘Anveshak’, the way it was transferred to RAW -- by floppy disk, CD or pen drive, the agency responsible for installation at the premises of RAW and other such details but the plea was refused by the government agencies. HC rejects ex-RAW official
  10. Atul Patankar

    Delhi HC reviewing RTI rules

    As reported by CJ SUbhash Chandra Agarwal at merinews.com THE CHIEF Justice of Delhi High Court AP Shah deserves compliments for his welcome initiative to rectify the wrong, by reviewing RTI rules at Delhi High Court which contradict the Right-To-Information Act as passed by the Parliament and given assent by the President of India. It is regrettable that the then competent authority at Delhi High Court allowed such rules which could even be tantamount to contempt of Parliament. Administrative action is needed against those responsible for framing such rules at Delhi High Court which deprived users of the RTI Act from seeking information from Delhi High Court. Observations by Justice AP Shah pleading for replacing the oath of secrecy into an oath of transparency making the judicial system accountable and transparent are worth appreciating. It is regretted that a judge with such noble thoughts could not be elevated to the Apex Court despite intervention by the Prime Minister’s Office. He has rightly observed the highlights of RTI Act in a judicial system like a check towards filing of false affidavits Source : Delhi HC reviewing RTI rules
  11. Many members of this forum have complained about RTI Rules and Fees framed by many High Courts in the country. In a landmark order, the CIC has recommended to the Delhi High Court, using its powers under Sec 25(5), to withdraw the application of the Delhi HC RTI Rules and Fees to its subordinate courts, citing jurisdictional issues. It has also recommended to the Delhi High Court to withdraw Rules 7(i), 7(vi), 7(vii), and 7(xiii) since they are beyond the exemptions provided for in Sec 8 and 9 of the RTI Act. In the same order, the CIC has quoted a recent judgment of the Delhi HC and held that Sec 22 of the RTI Act over rides CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. The High Court Rules of various High Courts are available here: RTI Guide The original order is attached to this post. SG-11012010-17.pdf
  12. Dated: 20th Jan, 2009 Friends, Thanks for your overwhelming response to my earlier post. Hope you all know the following incident:- One Mr. S C Agrawal had sought from the Supreme Court (SC) registry information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act regarding: 1. The assets of the Chief justice of India (CJI) and other Supreme Court judges, and 2. A copy of the 1997 resolution, which required every judge to make a declaration, before the CJI or the Chief Justices of High Courts concerned, of his or her assets in the form of real estate or investments held in his or her name or in the names of the spouse and any dependent person.While his plea for a copy of the resolution was accepted, his demand for information on whether the judges declared their assets to the CJI/Chief Justices of the High Courts and if so the details thereof was rejected by the registry on the ground that it was not in its possession. Mr. Agrawal moved the appellate authority, (as per recommendation of the RTI Act), which held that such information could not be provided!! (Just think!!) He then filed a revision appeal before the Chief Information Commissioner of India (CIC). The CIC rejected the Registry\u0026#39;s contention that the Supreme Court and the CJI were not bound to share such information. While his plea for a copy of the resolution was accepted, his demand for information on whether the judges declared their assets to the CJI/Chief Justices of the High Courts and if so the details thereof was rejected by the registry on the ground that it was not in its possession. At this, Mr. Agrawal moved the appellate authority, (as per recommendation of the RTI Act), which held that such information could not be provided!! (Just think!!) He then filed a revision appeal before the Chief Information Commissioner of India (CIC). The CIC rejected the Registry's contention that the Supreme Court and the CJI were not bound to share such information. ,"Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) Mr. Wajahat Habibullah and Commissioners A.N. Tiwari and M.M. Ansari, directed the Supreme Court Registry to furnish to Mr S C Agrawal, the above applicant, information on declaration of assets as per a May 7, 1997 resolution adopted at an all-India judges conference.
  13. As reported by Abhinav Garg, TNN at timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 31 May 2009 NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court thinks any transparency on action taken against errant trial court judges is "an unwarranted invasion of their privacy.'' For it has quelled an attempt to access these details in an application made to it under the Right to Information Act. HC has sought refuge behind its rule 5 (b) of Delhi High Court (RTI rules) to block information as the rule allows it to withhold information on this ground. "A number of complaints against judicial officers have been received in the vigilance branch during the last 10 years and on the basis of that, necessary action has been taken against erring judicial officers. The details of same can't be disclosed as it would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual'' says an RTI reply received from HC. The reply came on an RTI filed by a lawyer who had asked the method by which HC monitors the conduct of trial court judges, along with details of action taken against whom complaints were received pertaining to corruption or misconduct. While HC was quick to acknowledge that it has a vigilance branch for "supervizing and keeping watch on the conduct of trial court judges'' it chose to be non-transparent when asked to elaborate. For instance, the RTI pleas' pointed query on details of 10 oldest complaints still pending against trial court judges was shot down, again on the ground that it would cause "unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual.'' Similarly, when the RTI plea demanded to know the standards on which performance of judges is evaluated, HC promptly outlines these as knowledge of law/procedure, disposal of cases, quality of judgments, efficiency, reputation for honesty etc. But it remained unyielding on disclosing anything more. On being pressed for details like "how many judges have failed to meet the required evaluation consideration'' or "what action is taken against a judge who fails to meet the standard'' HC relied on its special RTI rule to deny information. The most that the court was willing to reveal was that whenever a complaint is received against any judicial officer, it is "laid before chief justice for consideration and orders and necessary action is then taken.'' Source: HC refuses to share info on errant judges - Delhi - Cities - The Times of India
  14. Atul Patankar

    Vanishing lake: HC seeks reply from govt

    As reported at timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 26 February, 2009 NEW DELHI: Within six years, the status of a prominent water body in the national capital has changed from a "wet and clean lake'' to "does not exist'' in the revenue records of the Delhi government. This status change of the natural reservoir in Mayapuri has prompted the Delhi High Court to demand an explanation from the state government and ask for its reply on a petition filed by an NGO, Tapas, which alleged that the 18,000 sq m area rich in aquifers was on its deathbed. V K Jain of Tapas based his petition on an RTI reply he received from the PWD last year which denied the existence of the lake and claimed that the water body was never under its jurisdiction. The petition alleges PWD owned the lake till 2003. "Local MLA Karan Singh Tanwar said as per the land records received from SDM (Delhi Cantt) and Patwari of that area in July 2007, it is informed that this was not a water body,'' the RTI reply of PWD said. Arguing before a division bench of HC, Jain, through his lawyer informed court that PWD's stand was in contrast to 2003 when the common effluent treatment plant was being made near Mayapuri lake. The department was asked to create another water body of the same size in Bawana for which the Delhi Jal Board had given an affidavit. "PWD had also submitted an affidavit claiming to have paid money to the MCD for removing encroachment on the lake located on the ring road near FCI at Naraina,'' the petition said. The lake which was spread over an area of 36,000 sq feet was reduced to half to pave way for the CETP for providing clean water in the area, it added. Urging HC to step in to save the water body, Jain said, "If no efforts are taken to save the lake, it would soon meet the fate of several other water bodies which have dried up because of developmental projects. In fact, except tall promises there are no sincere efforts on the part of the government to revive the dying lakes to ensure ecological balance in the water-parched city.'' The case will now come up for hearing on March 31. Source: Vanishing lake: HC seeks reply from govt-Delhi-Cities-The Times of India
  15. As reported at www.indianexpress.com on 13 March 2009 New Delhi : The CIC has imposed the maximum fine of Rs 25,000 on a Delhi High Court official for failing to respond to an RTI application forwarded to it by the Supreme Court of India. "...it appears that he has no submission justifying the failure to respond to the application transferred to him by the CPIO, Supreme Court of India. He has therefore rendered himself liable for the full penalty of Rs 25,000," Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah ordered. This is the maximum fine permitted by RTI Act. Habibullah directed the Registrar of Delhi High Court to recover this amount from Jt Registrar (establishment) and PIO P S Chaggar either directly or through deductions from his salary not exceeding Rs 5,000 per month from April 3. The case relates to RTI application filed by one Vijay Pal Singh who sought information, regarding a case filed by MCD against him, from the Supreme Court of India. The apex court forwarded the application to MCD and Delhi High Court as it was not the custodian of the information. While Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of MCD provided the information, though unsatisfactory as per Singh, the High Court representative did not even appear during the final hearing of the case at the CIC. Habibullah said Singh was free to move an appeal against the response given by MCD and a second appeal before CIC if dissatisfied. Source: CIC imposes penalty of Rs 25k on Delhi HC official
  16. Friends, I desperately want the copy of the petition filed by the CJI at the delhi HC against the CIC's order binding the SC registry to provide the declaration of assets of the SC judges and CJI as claimed by the one MR SC Agarwal. If the copy of the said petition is with anybody, please post it on the website or kindly mail it to me at xxx@yyy.zzz or send the web address from where it can be available. Regards, Sayantan Banerjee.
  17. Delhi High Court PIO issued Penalty Notice Admiting a complaint case (Complaint No. CIC/WB/C/2007/00445 dated 19.08.2007) by Ms. Shruti Singh Chauhan the Hon. CIC Mr. Wajahat Habibullah has issued notice to the PIO of Delhi High Court for imposition of penalty u/s 20(1). The complainant submitted her application on 23.05.2007. But she did not received any information within the stipulated time. "The Commission has decided to admit Ms. Chauhan’s complaint petition u/s 18 (1) © of the said act and hereby directs the PIO, High Court of Delhi to respond to the request for information to complainant Ms. Shruti Singh Chauhan within 15 working days from the date of receipt of this decision." "The PIO is further directed to show cause as to why a penalty of Rs.250/- per day from the date when the information fell due i.e. 23.06.2007 to the date when the information is actually supplied, not exceeding Rs.25, 000/- should not be imposed on him under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act. The PIO will make his submission in writing to us on or before 11.02.2008." http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_27012008_01.pdf Sidharth
  18. karira

    HC allows marks' disclosure

    HC allows marks' disclosure NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has allowed disclosure of marks obtained by candidates in judicial services examination conducted by it. The court took the decision on the recommendation of a three-judge committee appointed by HC Chief Justice, following refusal by its information officer to disclose the marks obtained by candidates in the Delhi Judicial Services exam. Informing the Central Information Commission, which was hearing an RTI appeal filed by a candidate Narender Yadav, HC's three-judge committee noted that its confidentiality clause of Delhi High Court (Right to Information) Rules, 2006 was not applicable in the case and the candidate was entitled to know his marks. The committee comprising justices Gita Mittal, A K Sikri and Mukul Mudgal said, ‘‘The committee has been consistently directing disclosure of marks and other non-confidential information to the candidates of judicial services examinations conducted by the court.'' After the committee recommendation, Yadav was told what his marks were in the 2006 exams. HC allows marks' disclosure-Delhi-Cities-The Times of India
  • Create New...

Important Information

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