Background

Numerous petitions seeking information from the court under RTI are asked to be applied under SC rules. Apart from this various courts have also framed their own rules under which various regulations. Further, although the courts were included in the definition of Public Authorities (section 2 (h)) most of the HCs did not even appoint Public Information Officers (PIOs) even months after this act came to force which denied people their right to information.

However, the Supreme Court Rules undermined the RTI in four key areas. Unlike the RTI Act, the Rules do not provide for:

♤ a time frame for furnishing information

♤ an appeal mechanism

♤ penalties for delays or wrongful refusal of information

♤ makes disclosures to citizens contingent upon “good cause shown”

In sum, the Rules allowed the judiciary to provide information at its unquestionable discretion, violating the text and spirit of the RTI. The RTI Act does not permit any appeals to be entertained by any court under Section 23. Section 23 of RTI Act forbids courts from entertaining “any suit, application or other proceeding in respect of any order made under this Act”. Nevertheless, the contradiction arises from the fact that the Indian Constitution gives powers to the Supreme Court and the high courts that override any statute.

Further, SC has said that the decision of the Registrar General of the Court will be final and not subject to any independent appeal to Central Information Commission. These issues have brought the credibility of judges further under question.