MSN: Bengaluru: Wednesday, 5Th February 2025.
Karnataka high court on Tuesday ordered notice to the state govt and also candidates appointed as the state chief information commissioner and information commissioners.
Hearing a petition
challenging the appointments, advocate-general Shashikiran Shetty informed the
court that a search committee was put in place for the appointments and
provisions contained in Section 15(3) of the Right to Information Act were
complied with. The directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Anjali
Bharadwaj too were followed. The court was informed that the appointees were
scheduled to take oath at Raj Bhavan at 5pm Tuesday.
"The state and all the respondents are put on notice that merely because they are being sworn in today, it shall not preclude this court from considering the interim prayer made by the petitioner, and this court may issue appropriate orders after the materials are placed before it... The appointment of the private respondents herein shall be subject to the final outcome of this writ petition," Justice R Devdas observed while adjourning the matter to Feb 10.
In his petition, K Mallikarjuna Raju, a Bengaluru-based RTI activist, claimed that in terms of the SC judgment in the Anjali Bharadwaj case, and the subsequent interim directions given by the top court, every state should have a search committee. The applications filed for information commissioner posts should be scrutinised by the committee, which has to place its recommendations before a panel comprising the chief minister, the leader of opposition in the assembly, and a cabinet minister nominated by the CM. The panel headed by the CM has to further place its recommendations before the governor.
According to him, the state govt hasn't complied with the SC's directions, and the selection of the appointees is be contrary to Section 15(3). Further, respondent no. 3 retired IPS officer Ashit Mohan Prasad, appointed as state chief information commissioner had not applied for the post, the petitioner stated.
On Jan 30, the govt appointed Prasad as chief information commissioner and seven others as state information commissioners.
Karnataka high court on Tuesday ordered notice to the state govt and also candidates appointed as the state chief information commissioner and information commissioners.
"The state and all the respondents are put on notice that merely because they are being sworn in today, it shall not preclude this court from considering the interim prayer made by the petitioner, and this court may issue appropriate orders after the materials are placed before it... The appointment of the private respondents herein shall be subject to the final outcome of this writ petition," Justice R Devdas observed while adjourning the matter to Feb 10.
In his petition, K Mallikarjuna Raju, a Bengaluru-based RTI activist, claimed that in terms of the SC judgment in the Anjali Bharadwaj case, and the subsequent interim directions given by the top court, every state should have a search committee. The applications filed for information commissioner posts should be scrutinised by the committee, which has to place its recommendations before a panel comprising the chief minister, the leader of opposition in the assembly, and a cabinet minister nominated by the CM. The panel headed by the CM has to further place its recommendations before the governor.
According to him, the state govt hasn't complied with the SC's directions, and the selection of the appointees is be contrary to Section 15(3). Further, respondent no. 3 retired IPS officer Ashit Mohan Prasad, appointed as state chief information commissioner had not applied for the post, the petitioner stated.
On Jan 30, the govt appointed Prasad as chief information commissioner and seven others as state information commissioners.