MY KOLKATA EDUGRAPH
ADVERTISEMENT
Regular-article-logo Wednesday, 06 August 2025

RTI setback for Supreme Court

Read more below

SAMANWAYA RAUTRAY Published 26.11.09, 12:00 AM

New Delhi, Nov. 25: The Supreme Court has received its second-ever Right to Information order from the central information commission, after the first caused it embarrassment on the subject of judges’ assets.

The commission has now directed the court to share with an RTI applicant within 15 days all information about the recent elevation of three judges to the apex court superseding three senior judges.

The commission yesterday rejected the apex court’s argument that the Chief Justice of India held such information in a fiduciary capacity (relating to a position of trust) and could not make it public.

The apex court has been asked to share the information with Subhash Chandra Agrawal free of cost, the commission waiving the Rs 10 fee because of the delay in furnishing the information.

Earlier, the apex court had refused to reveal to an RTI applicant whether judges declared their assets to the chief justice every year or not — only to relent under public pressure and post these statements on its official website.

The apex court had also faced embarrassment when the high court, hearing an appeal in the case, held against it saying the CJI’s office came under the RTI’s ambit. The apex court has appealed that single-judge order before a division bench.

Agrawal, a Delhi resident, had on January 27 this year sought access to the correspondence between constitutional authorities with file notings relating to the elevation of Justices H.L. Dattu, A.K. Ganguly and R.M. Lodha superseding Justices A.P. Shah, A.K. Patnaik and V.K. Gupta.

Minister scan

The commission has also sought from the apex court, under an RTI application from Agrawal, the name of the Union minister who allegedly approached a Madras High Court judge to influence his decision, and the complete correspondence with the CJI on the matter, PTI adds.

Justice R. Raghupathi of the high court had a few months ago alleged that a Union minister had, through his lawyer, spoken to him on the phone seeking favours in a case under CBI probe.

Follow us on:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT