The Supreme Court
declined to entertain a public interest litigation seeking directions
to make it necessary for judges of all high courts as well as the apex
court to disclose information about their wealth and assets if it was
sought under the Right to Information Act.
Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan had announced, in a recent
seminar, that judges were voluntarily providing this information to him.
The petition was filed by People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL),
seeking directions from the Supreme Court to bring the judiciary,
especially the higher judiciary, under the transparency law.
Refusing to issue any such direction, the Bench comprising Justices
Arijit Pasayat and P Sathasivam observed that “the petition is
thoroughly misconceived.”
K G Kannabiran, president of the PUCL who filed the petition,
extensively quoted the RTI Act and provisions of the Constitution,
seeking a direction to make the judiciary accountable and bring in
transparency.
The petitioner maintained that the CJI cannot deny information on the
mere ground that judges were Constitutional authorities.
Meanwhile, the Central Information Commissioner, Wajahat Habibullah has
called a full-bench hearing of the Central Information Commission, to
examine two RTI applications, that have asked if the Chief Justice of
India comes under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The two questioners are Subhash Chandra Agarawal and C Ramesh. Ramesh
had earlier wanted all communication between then President KR
Narayanan and then PM Atal Behari Vajpayee during the Godhra riots in
2002 to be made public.
Habibullah refused to comment on the CJI’s reported statement that his
office did not come under the RTI Act, saying he “did not know exactly
what was said by the Chief Justice” and he did not want to prejudice or
appear to have made up his mind on a matter yet to be heard.
But, he said; “We cannot create information, but we can certainly
insist that information, such as information regarding assets and
liabilities of heads of public bodies, if existing, should be made
available to the public. We have said so in the case of all public
bodies. Let’s see what the facts and arguments are in this case.”
http://www.lawyerscollective.org/content/sc-rejects-pil-asking-judge-assets%2C-rti-panel-take-call
Copyright @ 2007 Lawyers Collective.
