Hindustan Times: Mumbai: Wednesday,
October 26, 2016.
The Bombay
high court has held that the state chief information commissioner has powers
under Right to Information Act (RTI) to transfer State Information Commissioner
from one region to another for the purpose of ensuring that the Commission
functions in a smooth manner.
This
significant ruling was delivered by a bench headed by Justice V M Kanade, who
recently held that the State Chief Information Commissioner has such powers
under section 15(4) of RTI Act to transfer State Information Commissioners from
one region to another.
The bench was
hearing a petition filed by a Pune-based journalist Vijay Kumbhar challenging
transfer of Ravindra Jadhav, State information Commissioner posted at Amravati,
to another place.
Jadhav did
not challenge his transfer but Kumbhar filed a petition challenging the
transfer of Jadhav from Amravati to another place on the ground that the State
Chief Information Officer had no powers under RTI Act to transfer State
Information Commissioners.
The high
court was satisfied that the petitioner was a responsible public activist and
hence it permitted him to file this petition as a PIL.
“In our view,
the State Chief Information Commissioner has powers under section 15 (4) of RTI
Act to transfer State Information Commissioners from one place to another to
ensure smooth functioning of the Commissions in the State,” the bench ruled.
“If there is
any curb on his authority, the very aim and object of having the State
Information Commission would be rendered nugatory and would be defeated. We do
not see any substance in the petition,” said the bench.
“The petition
is therefore dismissed and the interim order passed earlier stands vacated,”
the bench uled.” It has to be remembered that the RTI Act was passed in order
to ensure that there is transparency in the functioning of the Governments and their
instrumentalities. In a democratic country, citizens are required to be
informed about the manner in which the governments and their authorities
function so that there is no scope for arbitrary action and also to contain
corruption and lastly to hold governments and their instrumentalities accountable,”
the bench further observed.