The Supreme Court has moved before itself a petition challenging the order of Chief Information Commissioner directing it to make public information pertaining to appointment of three judges to the Apex Court superseding senior judges.
The Apex Court also challenged another CIC's order, which had directed disclosure of communication between Chief Justice of India and Justice Raghupathy of Madras High Court on alleged interference by a union minister in a sub-judice matter.
Interestingly, deviating from the normal practice which was adopted by it in an earlier case on the assets declaration issue, the Court this time sidelined the Delhi High Court where appeals against the CIC's order have been filed.
The petition was filed by the Supreme Court Registry assailing the CIC's order, which has directed the court to divulge the information, contending that the material held by the CJI was kept under fiduciary relationship and should be exempted from being made public under Section 8(1)e of the transparency law.
The same legal issue on whether CJI's office comes within the ambit of RTI or not is pending before a full bench of the Delhi High Court after a single judge bench had rejected the apex court's plea that all the information with CJI cannot be revealed under the RTI.
The CIC, in a series of orders, has held that office of the CJI comes within the purview of the RTI Act and information held by the CJI should be revealed.
