Case Note & Summary
The High Court of Karnataka allowed two writ petitions filed by the State Public Information Officer and Deputy Registrar (Establishment) of the High Court of Karnataka, challenging an order of the Karnataka Information Commission dated 30.04.2013. The second respondent, N. Anbarasan, had filed RTI applications seeking certified copies of notices issued by the High Court to its judges regarding administrative matters. The Information Commission directed the petitioner to provide the copies. The High Court quashed the Commission's order, holding that the notices were 'personal information' exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, as they had no relationship to any public activity or interest. The court reasoned that the High Court holds such notices in a fiduciary capacity and that disclosure would invade the privacy of judges and undermine judicial independence. The court emphasized that the public interest override under Section 8(1)(j) was not established. The petitions were allowed, and the impugned order was set aside.
Headnote
A) Right to Information - Exemption from Disclosure - Personal Information - Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 - Notices issued by the High Court to its judges regarding administrative matters are 'personal information' having no relationship to any public activity or interest - The High Court, as a public authority, holds such notices in a fiduciary capacity - Disclosure would invade the privacy of judges and undermine judicial independence - Held that the Karnataka Information Commission erred in directing disclosure without establishing a larger public interest (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether notices issued by the High Court to its judges regarding administrative matters constitute 'personal information' exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, and whether the Karnataka Information Commission erred in directing their disclosure.
Final Decision
The writ petitions are allowed. The impugned order dated 30.04.2013 passed by the Karnataka Information Commission in KIC No.10682/PTN/2012 and KIC No.10684/PTN/2012 is quashed.
Law Points
- Right to Information Act
- 2005
- Section 8(1)(j)
- personal information exemption
- fiduciary relationship
- judicial independence
- proportionality test
- public interest override
Case Details
2019 LawText (KAR) (01) 16
W.P.No.26763 of 2013 (GM-RES) and W.P.No.26762 of 2013 (GM-RES)
S.S. Naganand, Senior Counsel with S.G. Prashanth Murthy for petitioner; G.B. Sharath Gowda for R1; Dr. S. Krishnamurthy for R2
State Public Information Officer & Deputy Registrar (Establishment), High Court of Karnataka
Karnataka Information Commission and N. Anbarasan
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order of the Karnataka Information Commission directing disclosure of notices issued to judges.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to set aside the order dated 30.04.2013 passed by the Karnataka Information Commission in KIC No.10682/PTN/2012 and KIC No.10684/PTN/2012.
Filing Reason
The petitioner challenged the Information Commission's order directing disclosure of notices issued to judges, claiming exemption under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
Previous Decisions
The Karnataka Information Commission had directed the petitioner to provide certified copies of notices to the second respondent.
Issues
Whether notices issued by the High Court to its judges regarding administrative matters are 'personal information' exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005.
Whether the Karnataka Information Commission erred in directing disclosure without establishing a larger public interest.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the notices are personal information having no relationship to any public activity or interest, and the High Court holds them in a fiduciary capacity.
Respondent argued that the information should be disclosed in the public interest.
Ratio Decidendi
Notices issued by the High Court to its judges regarding administrative matters constitute 'personal information' exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005, as they have no relationship to any public activity or interest, and the High Court holds such notices in a fiduciary capacity. Disclosure would invade the privacy of judges and undermine judicial independence.
Judgment Excerpts
The notices issued by the High Court to its judges regarding administrative matters are 'personal information' having no relationship to any public activity or interest.
The High Court holds such notices in a fiduciary capacity and disclosure would invade the privacy of judges and undermine judicial independence.
Procedural History
The second respondent filed an RTI application on 07.05.2012 seeking certified copies of notices. The petitioner denied the request. The second respondent appealed to the Karnataka Information Commission, which directed disclosure on 30.04.2013. The petitioner filed writ petitions under Article 227 challenging the order.
Acts & Sections
- Right to Information Act, 2005: Section 8(1)(j)
- Constitution of India: Article 227
