Central Information Commission: India

Select Language Afrikaans Albanian Arabic Armenian Azerbaijani Basque Belarusian Bulgarian Bengali Catalan Chinese (Simplified) Chinese (Traditional) Croatian Czech Danish Dutch English Estonian Filipino Finnish French Galician Georgian German Greek Gujarati Haitian Creole Hebrew Hindi Hungarian Icelandic Indonesian Irish Italian Japanese Javanese Kannada Khmer Korean Latvian Lithuanian Macedonian Malay Maltese Marathi Nepali Norwegian Persian Polish Portuguese Punjabi Romanian Russian Serbian Slovak Slovenian Spanish Swahili Swedish Tamil Telugu Thai Turkish Ukrainian Urdu Vietnamese Welsh Yiddish

Number of cases in CIC between January-June 2016; Graphic courtesy: The Times of India, July 2, 2016

This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. You can help by converting these articles into an encyclopaedia-style entry, deleting portions of the kind normally not used in encyclopaedia entries. Please also fill in missing details; put categories, headings and sub-headings; and combine this with other articles on exactly the same subject. Readers will be able to edit existing articles and post new articles directly on their online archival encyclopædia only after its formal launch. See examples and a tutorial.

Central Information Commission: exceeding powers

HC slams CIC for exceeding powers

TIMES NEWS NETWORK

From the archives of The Times of India 2007, 2009

New Delhi: Delhi high court on Friday clipped the wings of the Central Information Commission while quashing the latter’s observations against the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) vicechairman for failing to appear before it with regard to an RTI matter.

The high court has said the Central Information Commission has exceeded its powers. “This is a case where the Central Information Commission and the Chief Information Commissioner have overstepped their jurisdiction and have thereby transgressed the provisions of the very Act which created them,” said a division bench of Justices B D Ahmed and Veena Birbal.

The high court bench set aside the CIC’s September 2009 order against the senior-most officer of DDA and said “no adverse inference could have been drawn for the absence of the DDA vicechairman”.

HC clarified that the CIC could call any person to be present during the hearing before it only for the purposes of giving evidence — oral or written — or for producing any document.

“The DDA vice-chairman was not summoned for either giving oral evidence or written evidence or to produce any document or things in his possession. He was directed to be present for other reason. That power is not there with the CIC,” the court added.

The court also set aside the commission’s order appointing an inquiry committee to go into the details of dealing with the RTI Act by all wings and departments of DDA.

On September 22 last year, the CIC had formed the committee comprising director of ministry of urban development Shujata Chaturvedi, Dunu Roy from the Hazards Centre and Pankaj KP Shreyaskar, joint registrar, and sought a report within 45 working days from the date of order.

The commission order had come after DDA secretary V M Bansal was not able to clarify various points raised by the commission while hearing the plea of an RTI applicant Sarbajit Roy who had complained of poor implementation of RTI Act at the DDA.

toireporter@timesgroup.com