Chief Justice of India office under Right to Information: Supreme Court

Agencies
November 13, 2019

New Delhi, Nov 13: The Supreme Court on Wednesday held that the office of the Chief Justice of India is a public authority and falls within the ambit of the Right to Information Act.

A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi upheld the 2010 Delhi High Court verdict and dismissed three appeals filed by Secretary General of the Supreme Court and the Central Public Information officer of the apex court.

Cautioning that RTI cannot be used as a tool of surveillance, the top court in its judgement held that judicial independence has to be kept in mind while dealing with transparency.

The bench, also comprising Justices N V Ramana, D Y Chandrachud, Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, said that only the names of judges recommended by the Collegium for appointment can be disclosed, not the reasons.

While the CJI and Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna have penned one judgement, Justices Ramana and Chandrachud have written separate verdicts.

It said that the Right to Privacy is an important aspect and it has to be balanced with transparency while deciding to give out information from the office of the Chief Justice.

Justice Chandrachud, who wrote a separate judgment, said the judiciary cannot function in total insulation as Judges enjoy constitutional post and discharge public duty.

Justice Sanjiv Khanna said independence of judiciary and transparency go hand in hand.

Justice Ramana, who concurred with Justice Khanna, said there should be balancing formula for Right to Privacy and Right to transparency and independence of judiciary should be protected from breach.

The High Court on January 10, 2010 had held that the CJI office comes within the ambit of the RTI law, saying judicial independence was not a judge's privilege, but a responsibility cast upon him.

The 88-page judgement was seen as a personal setback to the then CJI, K G Balakrishnan, who has been opposed to disclosure of information relating to judges under the RTI Act.

The high court verdict was delivered by a three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice A P Shah (since retired) and Justices Vikramjit Sen and S Muralidhar. The bench had dismissed a plea of the Supreme Court that contended bringing the CJI's office within the RTI Act would "hamper" judicial independence.

Justice Sen retired as the judge of the apex court, while Justice Murlidhar is a sitting judge of the High Court.

The move to bring the office of the CJI under the transparency law was initiated by RTI activist S C Agrawal. His lawyer Prashant Bhushan had submitted in the top court that though the apex court should not have been judging its own cause, it is hearing the appeals due to "doctrine of necessity".

The lawyer had described the reluctance of the judiciary in parting information under the Right To Information Act as "unfortunate" and "disturbing", asking: "Do judges inhabit different universe?" He had submitted that the apex court has always stood for transparency in functioning of other organs of State, but it develops cold feet when its own issues require attention.

Referring to the RTI provisions, Bhushan had said they also deal with exemptions and information that cannot be given to applicants, but the public interest should always "outweigh" personal interests if the person concerned is holding or about to hold a public office.

Dealing with "judicial independence", he said the National Judicial Accountability Commission Act was struck down for protecting the judiciary against interference from the executive, but this did not mean that judiciary is free from "public scrutiny".

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 22,2024

suratBJP.jpg

The BJP has opened its account in the ongoing Lok Sabha elections. The party's candidate from Gujarat's Surat constituency, Mukesh Dalal, has won the polls as all his opponents are now out of the fray.

BJP's Mukesh Dalal elected unopposed from the Surat Lok Sabha seat after all other candidates withdrew from the contest, the party's Gujarat unit chief CR Paatil said today. Today was the deadline for withdrawing nominations.

The nominations of the Congress party's Surat candidate and his substitute were rejected by the returning officer over alleged discrepancies in paperwork, a development that the Congress called an attempt at "match-fixing".

"Surat has presented the first lotus to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. I congratulate our candidate for Surat Lok Sabha seat Mukesh Dalal for getting elected unopposed," Mr Paatil posted on the microblogging website X, referring to the BJP's election symbol.

Eight candidates - seven of them independents - and Pyarelal Bharti of the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) withdrew their papers.

The nomination papers of the Congress's Surat candidate Nilesh Kumbhani was rejected on Sunday after the district returning officer Saurabh Parghi found discrepancies in the signatures of the proposers.

The nomination form of Suresh Padsala, the Congress's substitute candidate from Surat, was also found invalid.

The returning officer had said the four nomination forms submitted by the two Congress candidates did not appear genuine. The proposers, in their affidavits, had said they had not signed the forms themselves, the returning officer said in the order.

Congress lawyer Babu Mangukiya said the party will approach the high court and the Supreme Court for relief.

Congress leader Jairam Ramesh in a post on X said the Surat developments indicate "democracy is under threat". "Our elections, our democracy, Babasaheb Ambedkar's Constitution - all are under a generational threat. This is the most important election of our lifetime," Mr Ramesh said.

Mr Ramesh alleged the "distress" of micro, small and medium enterprise (MSME) owners and the business community in PM Modi's "Anyay Kaal" and their anger have "spooked the BJP so badly that they are attempting to match-fix the Surat Lok Sabha polls, which they have won consistently since the 1984 Lok Sabha elections."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 24,2024

modiliar.jpg

Ambikapur (Chhattisgarh): Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Wednesday hit out at the Congress, saying the 'vote bank hungry' party wanted to implement reservation on the basis of religion.

Addressing a poll rally in Ambikapur, the headquarters of Surguja district in Chhattisgarh, PM Modi also said the Congress wanted to impose inheritance tax in the country and snatch the rights of people's children.

Some forces want a "weak" government of the Congress and "I.N.D.I." alliance in the country as they thought that if India becomes 'atmanirbhar' (self-reliant), their shops will be shut, he said.

"Today when I have come to Surguja, I want to present the Muslim League thinking of the Congress in front of the country. When their manifesto was released, on the same day I had said, and saying today also that the Congress manifesto has the imprint of Muslim League," Modi said.

When the Constitution was being drafted, it was decided under the leadership of Babasaheb Ambedkar that there would be no reservation on the basis of religion in India, he said.

"If there will be reservation then it will be for by Dalit brothers and sisters and tribal brothers and sisters," he said.

"But the vote bank hungry Congress never cared about the words of the great personalities, sanctity of the Constitution and the words of Babasaheb Ambedkar. Years ago, the Congress made an attempt to implement reservation on the basis of religion in Andhra Pradesh. Then Congress has planned to implement it in the entire country," Modi said.

They talked about implementing 15 per cent reservation on the basis of religion and said it will be done after curtailing the quota of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes, he added.

In its 2009 manifesto, Congress's intention was the same and in the 2014 manifesto, it clearly said it will not leave this issue, the prime minister said.

The Congress wanted to change the Constitution and hand over rights of the SCs, STs and OBCs to its vote bank, he said.

The intention of the Congress is not good, it is not according to the Constitution, social justice and secularism. If anyone can protect your reservation, it is the BJP, Modi said.

"The Congress's eyes are not only on your reservation, but also on your earnings, your houses, shops and farms. The 'shehzada' of Congress (apparently referring to Rahul Gandhi) says they will conduct an X-ray of the property of every house and every family in the country. The Congress will snatch all these from you and they say that they will equally distribute them," he said.

Do you know to whom they will distribute it after 'looting' it from you? Modi asked, to which the people replied in affirmative.

"I need not to tell you to whom they will distribute," he added.

Modi further said the 'dangerous intentions' of Congress are coming to forth one by one and now it says it will impose inheritance tax.

"The advisor of shehzada of the shahi parivar, who was also the advisor to the shehzada's father, had said that more tax should be imposed on the middle class and those who earn by toiling hard. Now the Congress says it will impose inheritance tax. It will impose tax on the assets inherited by people from their parents. Now, the panja (Congress poll symbol) will snatch the assets from your children," he said without taking any name.

The Congress' mantra is 'loot of Congress zindagi ke sath bhi, zindagi ke baad bhi', he said.

"They (Congress) want to snatch your assets and rights of your children," Modi added.

The PM also said he had come to seek people's blessings for a developed Chhattisgarh and a developed India.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 26,2024

evm.jpg

The Supreme Court of India on Friday, April 26, rejected pleas seeking 100% cross-verification of votes cast using EVMs with a Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) and said “blindly distrusting” any aspect of the system can breed unwarranted scepticism.

A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta delivered two concurring verdicts. It dismissed all the pleas in the matter, including those seeking to go back to ballot papers in elections.

An EVM comprises three units – the ballot unit, the control unit and the VVPAT. All three are embedded with microcontrollers with a burnt memory from the manufacturer. Currently, VVPATs are used in five booths per assembly constituency.

EVM VVPAT case: Supreme Court issues two directives

1.    Justice Khanna directed the Election Commission of India to seal and store units used to load symbols for 45 days after the symbols have been loaded to electronic voting machines in strong rooms.

2.    The Supreme Court also allowed engineers of the EVM manufacturers to verify the microcontroller of the machines after the declaration of the results at the request of candidates who stood second and third. The top court said the request for the verification of the microcontroller can be made within seven days of the declaration of the results after payment of fees.

Option for candidates to seek verification of EVM programmes

•    Candidates who secure second and third position in the results can request for the verification of burnt memory semicontroller in 5% of the EVMs per assembly segment in a Parliamentary constituency. The written request to be made within seven days of the declaration of the results.

•    *On receiving such a written request, the EVMs shall be checked and verified by a team of engineers from the manufacturer of the EVMs.

•    Candidates should identify the EVMs to be checked by a serial number of the polling booth.

•    Candidates and their representatives can be present at the time of the verification.

•    After verification, the district electoral officer should notify the authenticity of the burnt memory.

•    Expenses for the verification process, as notified by the ECI, should be borne by the candidate making the request.
What did the Supreme Court say?

•    "If EVM is found tampered during verification, fees paid by the candidates will be refunded," the bench said.

•    "While maintaining a balanced perspective is crucial in evaluating systems or institutions, blindly distrusting any aspect of the system can breed unwarranted scepticism...," Justice Datta said.

Who filed the petitions?

NGO Association for Democratic Reforms, one of the petitioners, had sought to reverse the poll panel's 2017 decision to replace the transparent glass on VVPAT machines with an opaque glass through which a voter can see the slip only when the light is on for seven seconds.

The petitioners have also sought the court's direction to revert to the old system of ballot papers.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.