Case Note & Summary
The University of Pune filed a writ petition challenging an order of the State Chief Information Commissioner (SCIC) dated 27 December 2013. The SCIC had directed the university to delete or correct certain clauses of Circular No. 239 of 2013 issued by the Vice Chancellor under Section 14(8) of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 (MU Act). The circular required that applications under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) for copies of assessed answer books be made to the university's Public Information Officer (PIO) and not directly to the concerned department. The SCIC held that this requirement was in conflict with the RTI Act, which allows citizens to seek information directly from any public authority. The High Court examined the powers of the Vice Chancellor under Section 14(8) of the MU Act, which permits the Vice Chancellor to issue directions to regulate matters not covered by statutes, ordinances, or regulations. The court noted that the Management Council had approved new ordinances concerning supply of photocopies of assessed answer books, but the circular was issued pending formal adoption. The court held that the circular did not deny information but merely prescribed a procedural requirement that applications be routed through the PIO, which is consistent with the RTI Act's scheme. The court also observed that assessed answer books are exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act as they are held in a fiduciary capacity, but the university had chosen to provide access. The court concluded that there was no conflict between the circular and the RTI Act, and set aside the SCIC's order. The petition was allowed, and the impugned order was quashed.
Headnote
A) Right to Information Act - Overriding Effect - Section 22 - Conflict between RTI Act and State Act - The RTI Act has overriding effect over other laws, but only where there is a direct conflict. The circular requiring RTI applications to be made to the PIO does not deny information but merely prescribes a procedure, which is not inconsistent with the RTI Act. (Paras 5-10) B) Maharashtra Universities Act - Vice Chancellor's Powers - Section 14(8) - Regulation of Access to Exam Records - The Vice Chancellor has power to issue directions to regulate matters not covered by statutes, ordinances, or regulations. The circular requiring RTI applications for answer books to be made to the PIO is a valid exercise of this power and does not conflict with the RTI Act. (Paras 3-4, 11-12) C) Right to Information Act - Exemption - Section 8(1)(e) - Fiduciary Relationship - Assessed answer books are held by the university in a fiduciary capacity and are exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. However, the university has chosen to provide access through a procedure, which is permissible. (Para 13)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the circular issued by the Vice Chancellor of University of Pune under Section 14(8) of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994, requiring RTI applications for copies of assessed answer books to be routed through the University's Public Information Officer, is in conflict with the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned order of the SCIC dated 27 December 2013, and held that the circular was valid and not in conflict with the RTI Act.
Law Points
- Right to Information Act
- 2005
- Section 8(1)(e) exemption
- Section 22 overriding effect
- Maharashtra Universities Act
- 1994
- Section 14(8) Vice Chancellor's powers
- harmonious construction
- procedural regulation not denial of information
