Indian Express: New Delhi: Thursday, August 24, 2017.
The Delhi
High Court today upheld a CIC order directing the Centre and the Intelligence
Bureau (IB) to give a copy of a report regarding alleged harassment and false
cases filed against IFS officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi for exposing graft during his
tenure as forest officer in Haryana.
Justice
Sanjeev Sachdeva dismissed the IB's plea challenging Chief Information
Commission's (CIC) April 2016 order directing them and Ministry of Environment
and Forests (MoEF) to provide a copy of the IB report in relation to the
harassment, human rights violation and false cases filed against Chaturvedi.
"The
appeal is dismissed," the court said. The detailed order is awaited.
While staying
the CIC decision, the court had asked the 2002 batch Indian Forest Service
officer of the Haryana cadre to file his reply to the IB's petition.
Appearing for
the IB, Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain had told the court that the
report cannot be made public as the agency is protected under section 24 of the
RTI Act, which provides that intelligence and security agencies cannot be
forced to make any information public.
However,
Chaturvedi, who served as the chief vigilance officer at AIIMS from 2012-14,
had relied on the proviso to Section 24 which goes on to say that though
intelligence and security agencies are exempt from the Act, they cannot claim
exemption if the information sought from them relates to corruption and human
rights violation.
Chaturvedi,
who is currently posted as Conservator of Forest at Haldwani in Nainital
District of Uttarakhand, had sought through RTI, a copy of the IB report
submitted in relation to false cases filed against him by "corrupt"
officers exposed by him during his term as divisional forest officer (DFO) in
Haryana.
MOEF had sought
the opinion of the IB, which had objected to the disclosure. Chaturvedi had
then approached the CIC.
The officer
in his application to the CIC had said that obtaining the report would help him
fight the violation of his human rights caused by those public servants whose
corruption he had exposed as part of his duties as an IFS officer.
He had argued
that the harassment and false allegations against him were directly linked to
his exposure of corruption in the Haryana government, as well as at the All
India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS).
The CIC had
held that even though the IB is exempted from sharing information under the RTI
Act, under Section 24 of the Act it has to share information pertaining to
allegations of corruption and human rights violations.