Chennai:
he Madras High Court today rectified a portion its own order of September 18 in which it had said the person who seeks information under RTI should state the reason for
doing so.
“An applicant making a request for information shall not be
required to give any reason for requesting the information or any otherpersonal details except those that may be necessary for
contacting him,” the bench, comprising Justices N Paul Vasanthakumar and K
Ravichandrababu, said.
The
bench noticed it had made an error in its September 18 order and rectified it
today saying Section 6(2) of the RTI Act, 2005, does not say
that the person seeking information has to submit details.
Shailesh Gandhi,
former Chief Information Commissioner and prominent RTI activist, said the Madras High Court’s order on September 18, infringes on a person’s constitutional rights.
“RTI
stems from Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution,
which deals with freedom of expression. By this logic, the court would want a
citizen to give reasons for speaking or writing. The Madras High Court order on September 18,
goes against the spirit of the RTI Act and the constitutional guarantee of
freedom of expression,” Gandhi said.
On
September 18, the court had quashed an order of the Central Information Commission, Delhi,directing it to give information to one B
Bharathi of Puducherry on some administrative matters of
the judiciary, saying it cannot be given as per various orders of the Supreme Court and High Court.
“Furnishing
of those information cannot be brought under the purview of the RTI Act as such
information pertain to the internal intricate functioning/administration of
High Court and such information has no relationship with any public activity or
interest,” the bench had said.
“Doing
so would hinder the regular, smooth and proper functioning of the institution,
unnecessarily warranting scrupulous litigations”, it had said and set aside the
matter.
The
bench had given the order on a petition filed by the Public
Information Officer who is also the Registrar.
Bharathi
had made applications under the RTI Act, seeking various informations,
including action taken on his complaint against Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, details of recruitment rules for the post of Registrar General of High Court and details of action taken on earlier
application regarding the appointment of Registrar General.
The
PIC had said Bharathi was called upon to peruse files on action taken on his
complaint against CMM. He was also informed that the complaint was closed.
Bharathi
had filed a petition on these matters for which the Court Registrar (Vigilance)
also informed him on August 21 about the action taken on his complaint against
the CMM.
He
had sought the contents of the file and minutes of the judges meeting
which was refused to be given.
PTI
