Madras High Court takes up suo motu review of RTI judgment; Says observations were made without noticing S. 6(2) of RTI Act

Bar & Bench: Chennai: Friday, 26 September 2014.

In a surprising development, the Madras High Court took up a suo motu review of its September 17 judgment on the Right to Information Act. As reported earlier, the Madras High Court had observed that all applications under the RTI Act would have to disclose reasons for why the information was sought. The judgment itself had, quite understandably, drawn criticism from a number of quarters.

In a not too subtle nod to this criticism, the bench of Justices directed that the matter be taken up for review. After going through the September 17 judgment, the bench held that

We have made certain general observations in paragraphs 20 and 21 stating that the RTI application should contain bare minimum details or reasons for which the information is sought for. However, the said general observations were made without noticing Sec. 6(2) of the RTI Act…. The general observations made in paragraphs 20 and 21 of the said order is an error apparent on the fact of the record, contrary to the statutory provisions.

According to the report in the New Indian Express, the court also stated an RTI application should not contain any reasons, and that the observations made in the September 17 judgment were set aside.

This order is remarkable for a number of reasons including the fact that it was a suo motu exercise of a review jurisdiction; instances of successful review petitions are becoming increasingly rare. To give credit where it is due, the High Court was quick to rectify an error, and did so in open court.

At the same time, it is unclear whether B Bharathi, the RTI activist who had approached the CIC for information on the High Court, will actually be provided the information he had sought for.