New
Indian Express: Cuttack: Friday, 16 April 2021.
The Orissa High Court has sought a fresh reply from the State government on the validity of the immunity provided by it to Vigilance wing from the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The Information and Public Relations department had issued a notification on August 11, 2016 which said, “In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section 4 of section 24 of RTI Act, 2005, the government does hereby specify that nothing contained in the said Act shall apply to the General Administration (Vigilance) department and its organisation.” A PIL filed in 2016 challenging the notification came up on Monday.
The division bench of Chief Justice S Muralidhar and Justice BP Routray posted the matter to August 23 after hearing both sides. According to the order, the State counsel stated that a similar challenge to a notification on the same lines issued by Tamil Nadu government was rejected by the Madras HC and sought time to file a detailed reply.
The bench allowed it time as last chance till May 17. The order said it was submitted on behalf of the petitioner that though impugned notification is purportedly issued under Section 24 (4) of the RTI Act, the first proviso thereto expressly states that the information pertaining to corruption and human rights violation shall not be excluded by that yardstick. Hence, the Vigilance wing cannot be excluded from the purview of RTI. RTI activist Pradeep Pradhan had filed the PIL. Acting on it, the HC had first sought a reply from the government on December 22, 2016.
The petition stated that transparency and accountability in functioning of public authorities are an essential component of democracy and any undue and unreasonable restriction by virtue of rules which have bearing with the RTI Act amounts to negating the idea of an informed citizenry where every citizen enjoys an equal right to information. This right cannot be allowed to be disturbed, especially by rules that are not backed by legislative sanction.
The Orissa High Court has sought a fresh reply from the State government on the validity of the immunity provided by it to Vigilance wing from the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The Information and Public Relations department had issued a notification on August 11, 2016 which said, “In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section 4 of section 24 of RTI Act, 2005, the government does hereby specify that nothing contained in the said Act shall apply to the General Administration (Vigilance) department and its organisation.” A PIL filed in 2016 challenging the notification came up on Monday.
The division bench of Chief Justice S Muralidhar and Justice BP Routray posted the matter to August 23 after hearing both sides. According to the order, the State counsel stated that a similar challenge to a notification on the same lines issued by Tamil Nadu government was rejected by the Madras HC and sought time to file a detailed reply.
The bench allowed it time as last chance till May 17. The order said it was submitted on behalf of the petitioner that though impugned notification is purportedly issued under Section 24 (4) of the RTI Act, the first proviso thereto expressly states that the information pertaining to corruption and human rights violation shall not be excluded by that yardstick. Hence, the Vigilance wing cannot be excluded from the purview of RTI. RTI activist Pradeep Pradhan had filed the PIL. Acting on it, the HC had first sought a reply from the government on December 22, 2016.
The petition stated that transparency and accountability in functioning of public authorities are an essential component of democracy and any undue and unreasonable restriction by virtue of rules which have bearing with the RTI Act amounts to negating the idea of an informed citizenry where every citizen enjoys an equal right to information. This right cannot be allowed to be disturbed, especially by rules that are not backed by legislative sanction.
.JPG)
.JPG)
