HC stays CIC's order to PMNRF to disclose institutional donors

Business Standard‎: New Delhi: Wednesday, November 16, 2016.

Delhi High Court today stayed the operation of a 2012 order passed by Central Information Commission (CIC) asking the Prime Minister's National Relief Fund (PMNRF) to disclose the details of institutional donors to the fund.

A bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Sangita Dhingra stayed the CIC's order till further direction saying the matter "requires consideration".

The bench was hearing PMNRF's plea challenging the single judge's verdict of November 19 last year which had dismissed its petition against the CIC order.

"This matter requires consideration," the bench said, adding, "the CIC order dated June 6, 2012 had remained stayed during the pendency of writ petition (filed by PMNRF before single judge). The same shall continue until further orders".

The bench fixed the matter for hearing on February 13 next year.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sanjay Jain, appearing for PMNRF, told the bench that it was an "important matter".

PMNRF had approached the single judge in 2012 challenging the CIC's order in which it had said, "we are of the view that the details of the institutional donors should be placed in public domain and disclosed to the appellant (Aseem Takyar)".

However, the CIC had said it would not be appropriate to direct the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of PMNRF to disclose the names of the recipients and beneficiaries of the fund.

Takyar had sought information regarding PMNRF including the names and particulars of donors and beneficiaries during the period from 2009 to 2011 under the RTI Act.

The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of PMNRF had provided some information to Takyar but had denied the details regarding donors and beneficiaries of the fund. Takyar had then approached the CIC.

After the CIC order, PMNRF had moved the high court when a single judge bench dismissed its plea saying the CIC's order was "well balanced".

PMNRF had challenged the single judge order saying such information was private and must be kept confidential.