Delhi High Court reserves order on appeal against denial of copy of SC collegium decisions under RTI Act
The court was hearing a matter that involved a collegium meeting dated December 12, 2018, wherein decisions were taken regarding the elevation of Justice Pradeep Nandrajog, then Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court, and Justice Rajendra Menon, then Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, to the Supreme Court. However, the decisions were not implemented, and the names were later removed.
A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad at the Delhi High Court today reserved orders on an appeal against a single judge bench’s order denying access to a copy of decisions of the Supreme Court collegium under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The court was hearing a matter that involved a collegium meeting dated December 12, 2018, wherein decisions were taken regarding the elevation of Justice Pradeep Nandrajog, then Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court, and Justice Rajendra Menon, then Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, to the Supreme Court. However, the decisions were not implemented, and the names were later removed.
An application was filed under the RTI Act to the Supreme Court’s CPIO for a copy of the agenda of the collegium meeting of December 12, a copy of the decision taken, and a copy of the collegium’s resolution.
The CPIO had denied the information citing that it is confidential, is exempted under Section 8 (1) (e) & (j) of the RTI Act and that the applicant has no right to access such information under Section 2 (j) of the RTI Act.
In the appeal, the first appellate authority dismissed the CPIO's arguments and upheld the denial of information on the grounds that no resolution exists.
Subsequently, the CIC also upheld the denial of information on the same ground as the first appellate authority.
A single judge bench of Justice Yashwant Varma of the Delhi High Court had dismissed the petition challenging the denial and ordered that a “decision” taken by the collegium must be embodied in a “resolution”, and since no resolution was passed at the meeting, no records could be provided.
In the appeal against the single judge bench order, it was emphasized that several documents and accounts are confirming the existence of the decisions made at the collegium meeting on December 12.
It was stated that the autobiography of the then Chief Justice of India, Justice Gogoi, who presided over the collegium, confirmed that decisions were made at the meeting and then goes on to state that the CJI chose not to send the decisions to the government and kept the matter on hold.
Justice Madan Lokur, one of the judges who served on the then-collegium, had also publicly confirmed that decisions were made at the meeting.
During the hearing today, Advocate Prashant Bhushan appearing for the petitioner argued that under the RTI Act, any material that exists on record must be provided to citizens and that whether or not the decision was later embodied in the form of a resolution was immaterial to access information.
Case Title: Anjali Bharadwaj v. CPIO, Supreme Court of India