Moneycontrol: New Delhi: Friday, July 07, 2017.
Why can't the
office of high constitutional functionaries like Governor come under the ambit
of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the Supreme Court asked on Thursday.
Why can't the
office of high constitutional functionaries like Governor come under the ambit
of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the Supreme Court asked on Thursday.
A bench of
Justices Arun Mishra and Amitava Roy raised the question during the hearing of
a plea filed by the Centre challenging a 2011 order of Bombay High Court
directing the disclosure of Governor's report given to the President about the
political situation in Goa in 2007.
"Why
cannot the office of high constitutional authorities like Governor be brought
under the ambit of RTI? There should not be anything to hide," the bench
remarked.
Solicitor
General Ranjit Kumar appearing for Centre said a similar petition was pending
before the apex court which should also be tagged along with the current
petition.
He said a
petition relating to disclosure of assets by Chief Justice of India has been
referred to a Constitution bench and the petition should also be tagged along
with it.
To this, the
bench said, even Chief Justice should not have any reason to keep the
information under the wraps regarding his assets.
Advocate
Prashant Bhushan, appearing for an intervenor, said the Governor's report also
cannot be kept under wraps and it should be brought under the ambit of the RTI
Act.
He said that
reports of the governor should be disclosed as directed by the Panaji bench of
Bombay High Court.
The bench
said that for tagging the earlier petition with the current petition, the
petitioner will have to mention the matter before the Chief Justice.
It posted the
matter for further hearing in the third week of August.
The Panaji
bench of Bombay High Court had extended the ambit of the RTI Act when it had
ruled that a Governor's report to the Centre about the political situation in
the state should be disclosed.
The High
Court had refused to accept the argument that the President and the Governors
were the heads of the country and the state respectively and were not amenable
to directions from any other authority like the state information commission.
It had said
that the President does not hold a fiduciary relationship with the Governors of
states and thus the information about the report made by the Goa Governor to
the President could not be held secret and kept out of the ambit of Act.
The then
leader of the opposition, Manohar Parrikar, had sought a copy of the Goa Governor's
report to the President under RTI Act regarding the political situation in the
state during the period between July 24-August 14, 2007.
The
governor's principal information officer (PIO) had declined to provide the
information.
However, the
Goa State Information Commission directed the Raj Bhawan to provide the report
to Parrikar.
The PIO
appealed against it before the Goa bench which ruled against it saying the
Governor cannot claim exemption under the clauses of Section 8 of the RTI Act
in respect of disclosure of a report made by him under Article 356 of the
Constitution.