•  •  Dark Mode

Your Interests & Preferences

I am a...

law firm lawyer
in-house company lawyer
litigation lawyer
law student
aspiring student

Website Look & Feel

 •  •  Dark Mode
Blog Layout

Save preferences

Delhi HC orders centre to find 3 central information commissioners in 6 weeks

With the Central Information Commission facing a huge pendency of cases, the Delhi high court on Friday directed the centre to finalise the selection of three central information commissioners within six weeks.

“The selection process that has already been commenced vide notifications dated 25 February, 2014, and 16 July, 2014, shall be finalised within six weeks from today (Friday) and the three vacancies of information commissioners existing as of today shall be filled up from amongst the 553 applications received in reference of the said two notifications,” a division bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice RS Endlaw said.

“The selection process pursuant to the circular dated 9 September, 2015, shall be confined for selection and appointment of the Chief Information Commissioner in the vacancy that would arise with effect from 2 December, 2015, and one information commissioner which is likely to arise with effect from 2 December, 2015.

“The tenure of Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) Vijai Sharma will be completed on 1 December, 2015, and in case one of the serving information commissioners is appointed as the CIC in the vacancy that would arise from 2 December, one more vacancy of the IC is likely to arise,” said the bench.

The court order came on a public suit filed by Right to Information activists RK Jain, Lokesh Batra and Subhash Chandra Agarwal.

The petitioners contended that the Central Information Commission (CIC) was created as a statutory body to decide appeals and complaints against public authorities for non-compliance of the RTI Act.

The commission’s proper functioning was essential for the proper implementation of the RTI Act, argued Prashant Bhushan, counsel for the petitioners. He said the government had attempted to stifle the functioning of the transparency law by failing to do its statutory duty to make appointments.

No comments yet: share your views