 "delhi, high court, delhi high court, delhi HC, HC,")
The Delhi High Court Friday reserved its order on an appeal challenging the decision of its single judge dismissing the plea seeking information under the RTI law on the agenda of a Supreme Court collegium meeting in 2018 concerning the elevation of judges to the apex court.
"We will pass an appropriate order," a bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad said after hearing submissions of the petitioner's counsel.
The appeal was filed challenging the single judge's March 30 order by which it had dismissed a plea challenging the Central Information Commission's order rejecting an RTI appeal seeking the agenda of the Supreme Court collegium's meeting on December 12, 2018.
The single judge had said that in the absence of any formal resolution being adopted and signed by the members of the Supreme Court collegium for the said meeting, the authorities rightly took the position that there was no material liable to be disclosed.
Petitioner and activist Anjali Bhardwaj, in her petition filed in the high court through advocate Prashant Bhushan, challenged the CIC's December 16, 2021 order by which her second appeal was dismissed and urged to direct the authorities to disclose the available information sought under the February 26, 2019, RTI application.
The petition said that on January 23, 2019, Justice Madan B Lokur, who was a part of the December 12, 2018 collegium meeting and retired on December 30, 2018, in an interview expressed his disappointment that the December 12, 2018 collegium resolution was not uploaded on the Supreme Court website.
During the hearing, Bhushan argued that the issue was very important as it relates to transparency in the appointment of judges.
"This makes a mockery of their own decision about transparency in appointment of judges which is necessary regarding resolutions of collegium apart from making a mockery. "
Referring to the Right to Information (RTI) Act, Bhushan submitted that every information which exists with a public authority has to be disclosed to the citizens unless it is exempted under section 8 of the Act.
"The question is can the citizens be denied this information under the RTI Act? No exemption under section 8 of the Act applies to information about the decision taken by the collegium to recommend judges for the appointment. In both these grounds, the information commission and single judge erred in denying us this information," he added.
The single judge had earlier stated that the collegium is a multi-member body whose decisions stand embodied in resolutions which alone represent the collective decision taken or the majoritarian view which prevailed and was adopted and in the present instance, since the issues which arose for discussion remained unresolved or in an inchoate state, no formal resolution came to be drawn up.
The court had further said that the petitioner's submissions addressed in the backdrop of certain newspaper reports are noticed only to be rejected as such reports have no evidentiary value and it would be transgressing its limitations if cognisance were to be taken of such unsubstantiated and unverified reports.
In the plea before the single judge, the petitioner had challenged the CIC's December 16, 2021 order by which Bhardwaj's second appeal was dismissed and had sought a direction to the authorities to disclose the available information sought for under the February 26, 2019, RTI application.
The petition had said that on January 23, 2019, Justice Madan B Lokur, who was a part of the December 12, 2018 collegium meeting and retired on December 30, 2018, in an interview expressed his disappointment that the December 12, 2018 collegium resolution was not uploaded on the Supreme Court website.
According to former Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi's autobiography 'Justice for the Judge', the names of Justice Pradeep Nandrajog, the then Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court, and Justice Rajendra Menon, the then Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, had received the nod for the elevation to the Supreme Court in the collegium meeting on December 12, 2018.
The matter allegedly got leaked after which the issue was kept in abeyance by Justice Gogoi till January 2019 because of winter break which started on December 15, 2018, the book said.
In January 2019, a new collegium got constituted after the retirement of Justice Lokur.
The new collegium, in its resolution on January 10, 2019, did not clear the names of Justice Nandrajog and Justice Menon for elevation to the Supreme Court, according to the book.
The petition has not mentioned the names of any judges whose names were allegedly cleared.
Initially, Bhardwaj had filed an RTI before the Supreme Court seeking copies of the agenda, decisions taken and resolutions passed in the December 12, 2018 meeting.
However, the Supreme Court Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) refused to provide the information and while disposing of the appeal against the denial by the CPIO, the First Appellate Authority (FAA) held that in view of the subsequent collegium resolution of January 10, 2019, it was clear that though certain decisions were taken in the collegium meeting of December 12, 2018, the required consultations could not be completed and no resolution was formally passed.
(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
