Bar
& Bench: New Delhi: Tuesday, 21 April 2015.
The Delhi
High Court has dismissed a petition which sought the release of medical
expenses incurred by Supreme Court judges under the RTI Act. The said petition
was challenging the order passed by a single judge Bench of the High Court
which had decided that medical reimbursements were to be kept out of the
purview of the Act because their disclosure did not serve any real public
interest.
Prashant
Bhushan had appeared for the petitioner Subhash Chandra Agarwal before a
Division Bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Deepa Sharma. The court
had asked Bhushan as to what public purpose would be served by releasing this
information. The Bench had also observed that the Petitioner had already been
provided with a consolidated amount which was apportioned as medical
expenditure for the judges.
Bhushan had
then argued that the money allocated to judges for their medical expenses was
appropriated from the public exchequer and therefore, the public had every
right to know as to how this money was being spent. He had also submitted that
the petition ought not to be treated as a probe into the medical history of
each judge and nor should it be viewed as an invasion of their privacy.
Appearing for
the Respondent, Siddharth Luthra had argued that,
“Although it
was too easy for the Petitioner to say that he does not seek details of the
medical condition for which the judge was undergoing treatment, but releasing
details of their medical expenditure would tantamount to revealing the exact
nature of their ailment.”
Luthra had
further pointed out that not only would this constitute as infringing their
privacy but also violate the Indian Medical Council of Act.
Speaking to
Bar & Bench, the petitioner Subhash Chandra Agrawal said,
"The
purpose behind filing of this petition was to educate the public about how
their money was being utilized. During the Sheila Dixit government we had filed
an RTI to release the medical records of serving MLAs and the results were
astonishing. It came to light that one of the MLA had reimbursed an amount of
Rs 1.45 crore towards his medical expenses while there were some MLAs who had
not even reimbursed bills running into a few thousand rupees. So if the
legislators can disclose their medical expense records, why not the judges?
Where more
than half of the population does not have entitlement to even basic medical
facilities, leave alone getting treated abroad, why should a select few have at
their disposal unlimited resources?"
When asked
about the Bench's observation that previously a consolidated figure of medical
expenses had been provided to him under an RTI application, Agarwal brushed it
aside and said,
"The
consolidated figure included the expenses of all employees in the Supreme
Court. Disclosure of that information does not serve any purpose of the
petition. We plan to move the Supreme Court with a Special Leave Petition in
this regard."
.JPG)
.JPG)
