New HC bench to hear PIL on staff over RTI query

Times of India: Mumbai: Wednesday, 06 August 2014.

A Bombay High Court judge recused herself from hearing a PIL filed against the court's staff for denying, in reply to an RTI query, a meeting between a former chief justice and a former chief minister.

Justice Anuja Prabhudessai, a member of the division bench, recused herself from hearing the case which will now come up before another bench.

The HC administration on Tuesday opposed a PIL seeking action against its staff for furnishing false information under the Right to Information Act and denying that on August 10, 2010, the then chief justice Mohit Shah met then CM Ashok Chavan at the latter's official residence, Varsha. The PIL was filed last year by activist Ketan Tirodkar, saying contradictory replies about the meeting were received under the RTI court officials denied such a meeting was held while the CM's office confirmed it.

The RTI application to the HC was made on October 30, 2010, by Namdeo Wagh of N K T College, Thane. In a November 16, 2010 reply, public information officer U S Srivastava stated "There is no such meeting held" and "hence there is no question of providing you minutes of the same". Wagh then applied under RTI to the CM's office on December 31, 2010. The additional secretary on January 31, 2011 confirmed the meeting between the CJ and CM did happen and was reflected in that day's agenda, adding details of what transpired between them were not available with the meeting cell and hence couldn't be given. The reply also stated it was unknown if the CJ was invited by a letter or a phone call.

Tirodkar's petition said there have been meetings earlier between CJs and CMs in pursuance with the convention that the two meet in their official capacity for HC-infrastructure related matters. "Such meetings are documented in the form of minutes on both sides,'' he stated.

On Monday before a division bench of justices Prabhudessai and P V Hardas, the HC's advocate M S Karnik raised a preliminary objection stating the RTI Act provides remedy of appeal and the petitioner should have exhausted it first. The judges also told Tirodkar he could have exhausted remedies under the Act. But Tirodkar said he had the right to approach any court for criminal action for any alleged offence of cheating.