Economic
Times: New Delhi: Saturday, 30 August 2014.
The
government's decision to put the appointment of a chief information
commissioner (CIC) on hold could mean that all orders passed by the Central
Information Commission can be quashed in court. The commission is the apex body
for redressing Right to Information (RTI) complaints and has been without a
head since the departure of Rajeev Mathur last week.
Various high
courts have ruled earlier that any order passed by the state information
commissions can be quashed if a chief information commissioner or information
commissioners are not in place.
The procedure
for appointments at the state and central information commissions is similar. RTI
experts said these high court orders could be cited to quash rulings of the
central information commission until the appointment of a new CIC.
In May 2007,
the high court of Himachal Pradesh directed the state government to appoint at
least one state information commissioner in accordance with the RTI Act and in
case it failed to do so, the state information commission "being an
improperly constituted body shall cease to exist or function."
Further, in
January 2010, the Calcutta High Court said the state information commission was
a multi-member body consisting of a chief information commissioner and at least
one information commissioner.
This was
reiterated by the Bombay High Court ruling of December 2013 which held that
every application needs to be considered by the multi-member bench of the
commission and if not orders passed by the body deserve to be quashed and set
aside.
Former CIC
Satyananda Mishra agreed that orders passed without a chief in place could be
quashed if challenged in the Supreme Court or high courts as the Act clearly
stipulates that the commission should have a CIC. "In the interest of the
transparency and the efficient implementation of the RTI Act, the government
should appoint a CIC at earliest," he added.
.JPG)
.JPG)
