Order of CIC, Delhi set aside

Madras High Court today quashed an order of the Central Information Commission, New Delhi, directing the Madras High Court to furnish information to one B Bharathi of Puducherry regarding certain administrative matters of Judiciary.
A Division Bench comprising Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice K Ravichandrababu, allowing a petition filed by the Public Information Officer who is also the Registrar, in its order said "the impugned order of the CIC, New Delhi, in directing the High Court to furnish those information is erroneous and not sustainable in view of earlier decisions rendered by this court and Supreme Court."
Bharathi had made applications under the provisions of 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.

According to Public Information Officer, Bharathi was called upon to peruse the files regarding the action taken on his complaint against the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM). It was also informed through a communication to Bharathi that the complaint was closed.
But Bharathi filed a writ petition on these matters for which the Registrar (Vigilance) of the High Court also informed him through a communication on August 21 about the action taken on his complaint against the CMM.
But Bharathi sought for the contents of the file and minutes of the Judges meeting which was refused to be given.

The bench said "such information cannot be furnished to Bharathi as per the decisions of Supreme Court and High Court."

On CIC's direction to furnish certain details on the recruitment rules for the post of Registrar General and Selection Committee, the bench said "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."
"Furnishing of those information will hinder the regular, smooth and proper functioning of the institution, unnecessarily warranting scrupulous litigations", the bench said and set-aside the matter.