Madras High Court Sets Aside CIC Order on Journalist's COVID-19 RTI Requests

Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

The matter pertains to RTI requests filed in 2021 by independent journalist Saurav Das who sought information on the actions taken by the Central Government to control the spread of COVID-19 and the treatment provided to those affected

The Madras High Court has set aside the order passed by the Chief Information Commissioner, Central Information Commission on August 16, 2021 regarding an RTI request filed by independent journalist Saurav Das. Das had sought information on the actions taken by the Central Government to control the spread of COVID-19 and the treatment provided to those affected. The CIC had asserted that the requested information had been provided.

Though the order of the high court was passed on December 17, 2023 and it was supposed to be officially uploaded by May 10, 2024. However, it was uploaded to the court's website on May 28, 2024.

The matter pertained to the writ petition filed by Das in 2022. Das, claimed that the Public Information Officer and the Appellate Authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005, had failed to supply the information he requested. This information pertained to various measures taken by the Central Government to manage the COVID-19 pandemic and the treatment given to affected individuals and their families. Consequently, Das filed second appeals under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act before the Chief Information Commissioner.

On August 16, 2021, the CIC concluded through a common order that the information sought by Das had been furnished. However, the high court found that the CIC's order lacked detailed discussion or substantial proof to support this conclusion.

Court noted that none of the involved officials—including the Central Public Information Officer (Under Secretary, Department of Health & Family Welfare, Drugs Regulation Section), the Public Information Officer (Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion, IPR – Copyright Section), the Public Information Officer (North Eastern Indira Gandhi Regional Institute of Health and Medical Sciences), and the Public Information Officer of Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER)—could present evidence to the court proving that they had provided the requested information to Das.

As a result, the high court set aside the CIC's order and remitted the matter for reconsideration, emphasizing that a fresh order should be passed without any influence from the prior decision. Court, however, clarified that it had not expressed any views on the merits of the case itself.

"The First Respondent shall afford full opportunity of hearing to all parties concerned following the prescribed procedure in consonance with the principles of natural justice and pass reasoned orders dealing with each of the contentions raised by them on merits and in accordance with law and communicate the decision taken under written acknowledgment," court ordered.

The matter is scheduled to be heard again before the Chief Information Commissioner on June 19, 2024.

Case Title: Saurav Das v. Chief Information Commissioner, Central Information Commission and Others