CIC emphasizes RTI Act's intent for personal use by citizens, not as a tool for professional ends by advocates.
In a significant ruling, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has reinforced the boundaries of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, emphasizing that advocates cannot utilize the Act to seek information on behalf of their clients. This decision came in the case of Paramjeet Yadav v. CPIO, where the appellant, an advocate, sought information from the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) regarding a contract termination affecting his brother's business.
The judgment, delivered by Information Commissioner Sudha Rani Relangi, reiterated the principle set by the Madras High Court in N. Sarvanan v. Chief Information Commissioner, Tamil Nadu SIC. The CIC noted that the RTI Act is intended for personal use by citizens and not for professional purposes by advocates seeking to advance their practice. The Commission highlighted that allowing advocates to use RTI for their clients could undermine the Act's objectives.
The case arose when Paramjeet Yadav filed an RTI application on July 3, 2024, requesting detailed information about a contract concerning fruit and vegetable supplies to a school, which was allegedly terminated unfairly. The CPIO responded, and subsequent appeals were filed by Yadav, culminating in the current hearing before the CIC.
During the proceedings, the appellant was notably absent, and the CPIO, represented by Principal-cum-PIO Shri Lalit Kalra, maintained that the information had already been provided in compliance with the RTI Act. The CPIO also clarified there was no improper relationship influencing the contract's reassignment, countering the appellant's allegations.
The Commission, after reviewing the submissions, found no fault in the CPIO's response. However, in the spirit of transparency, the CIC directed the CPIO to furnish copies of written submissions and enclosures to the appellant at no cost.
This judgment reaffirms the CIC's commitment to maintaining the integrity of the RTI Act, ensuring it serves its intended purpose of empowering citizens while preventing its misuse for professional advantages.
Bottom Line:
An advocate cannot seek information under the RTI Act on behalf of their client. The RTI Act is intended for personal use by citizens and not as a tool for professional ends by advocates.
Statutory provisions: Right to Information Act, 2005
Paramjeet Yadav v. CPIO, (CIC)(New Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2840106
