LegallyIndia.com

According to draft Overall Public Satisfaction (OPS), data compiled by the Magsaysay awardee Arvind Kejriwal-led NGO Parivartan as part of an initiative to promote people’s right to access information from government organisations. West Bengal is at the bottom of the heap, scoring just 6% in OPS while Karnataka tops the country in implementing the Right to Information (RTI) Act, scoring 55%..

There is no dispute that the Supreme Court and all other courts are public authorities under the RTI Act. Its a different issue whether the office of the CJI is a public authority or not. Even though two courts have held it to be so, final determination in the matter is still pending before the Supreme Court.

Chapter II of the RTI Act deals with right to information and obligations of public authorities. Section 4 of the Act mandates that it shall be a constant endeavour of every public authority to take steps to provide as much information suo motu to the public at regular intervals through various means of communications, including internet, so that the public have minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information. For the said purposes, every information shall be disseminated widely and in such form and manner which is easily accessible to the public.

All the kinds of information enumerated in section 4(1) of the Act was to be published within one hundred and twenty days from the enactment of this Act. The Act was enacted way back in 2005. and thus the one hundred and twenty years have long gone by.

It appears that the Calcutta High Court, as it continues to decide matters relating to the Act, despite being a public authority, fails to disclose on its website the information as mandated by the Act.

And this blatant violation of the mandate of law stares at your face in the highest court of this communist state by the complete absence of the RTI disclosure mandated under the RTI Act, 2005.

There is possibly no reason to assume that the same agency (NIC) which has created and designed the websites of the Supreme Court and high courts and has created an icon/provision for the RTI therein has failed to display the said information inadvertently while designing the site. The said agency, NIC, obviously is not in a position to do so since it does not decide what information is disclosed.

A lot of questions to ask.

But who is the Public Information Officer of the Calcutta High Court?