Media stories on HC's Historic verdict in RTI case :SC (Registrar) versus Commodore Lokesh K. Batra
(May give it wider Circulation)
------------------------------
The Telegraph
Justice is blind – to rank of court
R. BALAJI
New Delhi, Dec. 4: The office that runs the highest court of the land learned two lessons today: size doesn't matter. Neither does the universal excuse called "sub judice".
Delhi High Court directed the Supreme Court registry to provide an RTI applicant with the information he had sought about judgments that the apex court had reserved and were still pending.
The Supreme Court registrar-general had contended that the information could not be revealed as the matters were sub judice and protected under Article 145 of the Constitution, which allows the country's highest court to formulate its own rules and regulations.
"Sub judice" is an all-season shield usually worn by those caught in controversies to dodge uncomfortable questions outside courtrooms.
But a single-judge high court bench rejected the argument, saying that only information — not a rule change — was being sought.
It dismissed the apex court registry's appeal against a Central Information Commission order in favour of RTI applicant Lokesh Batra.
"Article 145 of the Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court to make rules as to practice and procedure of the said court. The impugned order does not in any manner seek to alter, add or amend any practice or procedure of the court," Justice Vibhu Bhakru of the high court said.
"The impugned order is limited to ensure that records are arranged and maintained in a manner so as to facilitate access to certain information." Justice Bhakru added: "I find no infirmity with the impugned order in so far as it directs that the records may be maintained in a manner so that the information regarding the period for which the judgments are pending after being reserved is available with the petitioner in future."
On August 3, 2011, the Central Information Commission had directed the central public information officer of the Supreme Court to provide the information sought after the apex court registry had refused to part with it citing Article 145 and the sub judice status of the matter.
Batra's application had sought to know the total number of cases where judgments had been reserved and were pending, dividing these cases under three categories depending on when the arguments had been heard: (a) before December 31, 2007; (b) between January 1 and December 31, 2008; and (c) between January 1 and December 15, 2009
Read more at Link below : :
=====================================
Indian Express
...........
Delhi HC goes against SC: must reveal information on pending verdicts
By Aneesha Mathur | New Delhi | Posted: December 5, 2014 1:26 am
The Delhi High Court Thursday ruled that it was in the public interest to know how many and for how long cases in the Supreme Court awaited judgments after conclusion of arguments.
Dismissing an appeal by the Supreme Court against parting with such information, Justice Vibhu Bakhru held: "Indisputably, the period for which a case remains pending after the arguments, is relevant for any citizen who desires to know about the pendency of cases before the SC."
The SC had moved an appeal against a 2011 verdict by the Central Information Commission, asking its registry to give information to RTI activist Commodore Lokesh Batra about pending cases which had been heard and in which orders had been reserved by the SC.
The CIC further directed that if the information was not available, the SC registry should make necessary arrangements for compiling such information and disclose it in the public domain in future.
The SC registry told the HC that this CIC order violated Article 145 of the Constitution, under which the SC was empowered to make its own rules on procedure. It said although such data was maintained, it was not being collated in any particular format and it should not be made public.
Justice Bakhru disagreed. He said information on pendency was "vital information regarding functioning of the courts". The HC recalled the SC's 2011 judgment pointing out that the confidence of the litigants in the results of the litigation is shaken if there is unreasonable delay in rendering a judgment after reserving it.
The HC said although the CIC could not have ordered to put all the statistics in the public domain in a prescribed format, there was nothing wrong "in so far as it directs that the records may be maintained in a manner so that the information regarding the period for which the judgments are pending after being reserved, is available with the petitioner in future."
The HC said the SC registry's view that it had no obligation to provide the information if it is not maintained in a particular form "cannot be accepted". It also dismissed the argument that the CIC order violated the SC's powers. The HC order comes when the SC is yet to rule in several cases where proceedings are over. For example, it took 21 months — after it reserved judgment — for the SC to reject the Delhi HC's verdict on decriminalising homosexuality.
Read more at Link below : :
====================
Hindustan Times
HC asks apex court registrar to furnish info on cases sought under RTI
Soibam Rock Singh, New Delhi, December 06, 2014
In a significant verdict aimed towards bringing greater transparency in the judiciary, the Delhi High Court on Thursday asked the registrar of the Supreme Court to maintain a compilation of pending cases, which had been heard and orders reserved.
"Indisputably, the period for which a case remains pending after the arguments, is relevant for any citizen who desires to know about the pendency of cases before the Supreme Court," Justice Vibhu Bakhru remarked.
The HC upheld the order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) directing the Central Public Information Officer of the Supreme Court (CPIO) to provide information regarding pending cases on an RTI request made by RTI activist Commodore Lokesh K Batra.
The CIC had further directed that if the information was centrally not available, the necessary arrangement be made in future for compiling such information and disclosing it in the public domain.
The high court observed that the information regarding cases where the order has been reserved is information that is contained in the documents, including orders passed by courts, that are available with the registry of the SC.
Apparently, the CPIO of the SC had denied the RTI request to provide data of those cases whose argument are heard and judgment have been reserved since December 2009, saying it did not maintained the data in the manner sought by Batra.
Saying that the CIC's order, "Does not in any manner seek to alter, add or amend any practice or procedure of the court," the HC added, "The order is limited to ensure that records are arranged and maintained in a manner so as to facilitate access to certain information."
In 2010, the high court had in another case held that the office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) is a "public authority" that comes within the ambit of the Right to Information (RTI) Act and it is bound to provide information about the declaration of asset details by the apex court judges.
Commenting on the Thursday verdict, Batra said, "It is gratifying that justice has been done after five years of battle."
Read more at Link below : :
------------------------------------
PTI / ET / Zee News
Give data of cases in which order reserved: HC to SC registry
Last Updated: Thursday, December 4, 2014 - 21:17
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court today directed the Supreme Court registry to provide information to an RTI activist regarding cases which have been heard but judgments have been pending after being reserved.
Justice Vibhu Bakhru issued the direction while upholding the August 2011 order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) directing the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the apex court to provide the information sought.
Justice Bakhru also held as "unsustainable" the stand of the registry that since the data asked for is not maintained in the manner sought by Right to Information (RTI) activist Commodore (retd.) Lokesh K Batra, it was not under any obligation to provide the same.
"In the present case, it is the stand of the petitioner (SC registry) that it does not maintain the data in the manner sought for and thus, has no obligation to provide the same to respondent 1 (Batra). This stand is, clearly, unsustainable," the judge said.
The high court while asking the SC registry to provide the information, observed that "the period for which a case remains pending after arguments, is relevant for any citizen who desires to know about the pendency of cases before the apex court".
The court also observed that in the instant case the information was denied as it would require sifting through the data so available.
"I find no infirmity with the impugned order insofar as it directs that the records may be maintained in a manner so that the information regarding the period for which the judgments are pending after being reserved, is available with the petitioner in future," the judge also said.
It, however, refused to uphold the CCI's order to the extent it required that the information sought be also placed in a public domain.
Batra in his RTI application had sought data of pending cases in which arguments have been heard between 2007-2009 and judgements have been reserved.
The CPIO had rejected his plea by an order dated January 12, 2010 saying the data is not maintained by the registry in the manner as sought for by him.
His appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA) was also dismissed and against the same he had moved CCI which directed CPIO to provide the information.
PTI
Read more at Link below : :
------------------------------
IANS / BS
Maintain compilation of pending cases: Delhi HC to SC registrar
IANS | New Delhi December 4, 2014 Last Updated at 22:40 IST
The Delhi High Court Thursday asked the registrar of the Supreme Court to maintain a compilation of pending cases, which have been heard and on which orders have been reserved.
In a significant verdict aimed towards greater transparency in the judiciary, Justice Vibhu Bhakru said: "Indisputably, the period for which a case remains pending after the arguments is relevant for any citizen who desires to know about the pendency of cases before the Supreme Court."
The high court upheld the order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) directing the Central Public Information Officer of the Supreme Court (CPIO) to provide information regarding pending cases on a Right to Information (RTI) request made by activist Commodore Lokesh K. Batra.
It also asked the CIC that if the information was centrally not available, the necessary arrangement be made in future for compiling such information and disclosing it in the public domain.
The CPIO had denied the RTI request to provide data of those cases whose arguments were heard and judgment reserved since December 2009, saying it did not maintain the data in the manner sought by Batra.
"In the present case, it is the stand of the petitioner (Supreme Court registry) that it does not maintain the data in the manner sought for and thus, has no obligation to provide the same to Batra. This stand is, clearly, unsustainable," the court said.
Read more at Link below : :
-------------
NOTE :- The Hindu also carried this Story (Link not available)- Many more stories are available on Net.l
__._,_.___
Posted by: Lokesh Batra <batra_lokesh@yahoo.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (1) |
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment