Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Janhit Manch and others, filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Bombay High Court challenging the appointments of the Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners under the Right to Information Act, 2005. They sought a declaration that these appointments were ad-hoc or temporary and prayed for the formation of an impartial sub-committee to assist the selection committee in scrutinizing applications and shortlisting candidates for the posts. The court, after considering the provisions of Sections 12 and 15 of the RTI Act, which deal with the constitution of the Central Information Commission and State Information Commission respectively, found no merit in the petition. The court observed that the selection process was in accordance with the Act and dismissed the PIL, declining to interfere with the appointments or direct the formation of any sub-committee.
Headnote
A) Right to Information Act, 2005 - Appointment of Information Commissioners - Sections 12 and 15 - Challenge to appointments as ad-hoc or temporary - Petitioners sought declaration that appointments were irregular and sought formation of impartial sub-committee for selection - Court held that the petition lacked merit and dismissed it, finding no substance in the allegations of irregularity in the selection process (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appointments of the Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners under the Right to Information Act, 2005 are irregular and whether the court should direct formation of a sub-committee to assist the selection committee.
Final Decision
The Bombay High Court dismissed the PIL Writ Petition No.8 of 2006, finding no merit in the challenge to the appointments of the Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Law Points
- Right to Information Act
- 2005
- Sections 12 and 15
- Appointment of Information Commissioners
- Selection Committee
- PIL
- Public Interest Litigation
- No interference in policy decisions
Case Details
PIL WRIT PETITION NO.8 OF 2006
R.M. Lodha, Naresh H. Patil
Mr.B. Raiyani (petitioner-in-person), Mr.B.A. Desai (Additional Solicitor General with Mr.Rajiv Chavan for respondent Nos.1 & 3), Mr.K.R. Belosey (AGP for respondent No.2)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Public Interest Litigation challenging the appointments of Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Remedy Sought
Declaration that the appointments are ad-hoc or temporary and direction to form an impartial sub-committee to assist the selection committee.
Filing Reason
Alleged irregularities in the appointment process of Information Commissioners under the RTI Act.
Issues
Whether the appointments of Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners under the RTI Act, 2005 are irregular?
Whether the court should direct formation of a sub-committee to assist the selection committee?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the appointments were ad-hoc or temporary and that an impartial sub-committee should be formed to assist the selection committee.
Respondents (Union of India and others) opposed the petition, likely arguing that the appointments were made in accordance with the Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found no substance in the allegations of irregularity in the selection process for the appointments under the RTI Act, 2005, and declined to interfere with the appointments or direct the formation of any sub-committee.
Judgment Excerpts
By this writ petition, the petitioners have, inter alia, prayed that the Chief Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioners appointed under the Right to Information Act, 2005 be declared as ad-hoc or temporary appointees...
The Right to Information Act, 2005 was enacted by the Parliament to provide for setting up the practical regime of right to information for citizens...
Procedural History
The petitioners filed a PIL Writ Petition No.8 of 2006 in the Bombay High Court challenging the appointments under the RTI Act, 2005. The court heard the matter and dismissed the petition on 20th July 2006.
Acts & Sections
- Right to Information Act, 2005: 12, 15
