Court Sets Aside State Information Commission's Order to Disclose Personal Information Under RTI
In a significant ruling, the Chhattisgarh High Court has quashed the State Information Commission's directive mandating the disclosure of personal information concerning judicial officers under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The court, presided over by Justice Sachin Singh Rajput, determined that such information, including complaints, certificates submitted for job acquisition, and details of departmental inquiries, is exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act unless a larger public interest is demonstrated.
The case, comprising multiple writ petitions, involved the State Information Commission's order directing the release of confidential information about three judicial officers in response to an RTI application by Rajkumar Mishra. The Commission's decision was contested by the High Court of Chhattisgarh, which argued that the directive was without jurisdiction and violated the statutory provisions of the RTI Act.
In its judgment, the court clarified that the information sought qualifies as personal information, which does not relate to any public activity or interest and whose disclosure would infringe on the privacy of individuals unless justified by a larger public interest. The court emphasized that the applicant failed to establish such a public interest.
The court also addressed procedural aspects, rejecting the contention that the State Information Commission's decision-making process was flawed due to the absence of a multi-member quorum. It asserted that individual members of the Commission possess the authority to decide second appeals independently, supporting the efficient functioning of the Commission.
Furthermore, the court highlighted the unique status of judicial officers, distinguishing them from civilian government employees. It emphasized that judicial service involves sovereign judicial power and is subject to the exclusive administrative and disciplinary control of the High Court, underscoring the necessity of maintaining the confidentiality of records to preserve judicial independence and objectivity.
The ruling underscores the balance between transparency and privacy within the framework of the RTI Act, affirming the protection of personal information of judicial officers unless overriding public interest necessitates disclosure.
Bottom Line:
Right to Information Act, 2005 - Information pertaining to judicial officers' complaints, certificates, and departmental inquiries held to be personal information under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act and exempt from disclosure unless larger public interest is established.
Statutory provision(s): Right to Information Act, 2005 Sections 2(f), 6(1), 8(1)(j), 15(1), 19(3), 19(7)
High Court of Chhattisgarh v. Rajkumar Mishra, (Chhattisgarh) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2838190
