Delhi High Court on Monday stayed a single judge’s order directing Supreme Court registry to provide information to an RTI activist regarding cases whose judgements have been pending after being reserved. A bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw also issued notice to RTI activist Commodore (retd) lokesh K Batra, the apex court’s Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) and the Appellate Authority, under the transparency law as they have been made parties in the appeal filed by the apex court registry.
The High Court sought their responses by February 12, till when its single judge order of December 4 last shall remain stayed. Apart from directing the apex court’s CPIO to give the data sought by Batra, the December 4 order had also held as “unsustainable” the stand of the registry that since the data asked for was not maintained in the manner as was sought, it was not under any obligation to provide the same.
The Supreme Court registry in its appeal, settled by senior advocate AS Chandhiok and advocate Ritesh Kumar, has said that “information with respect to each and every judgement reserved is available in public domain, case wise”.“Similarly, where a judgement or order is pronounced, same is also placed in public domain. Therefore, it is not a case of non-availability of information,” the petition said.
It said the information sought by Batra “may not be in a form or manner in which respondent wants it”. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who appeared for Batra, opposed the contentions of the apex court registry and supported the December 4 judgement of the High Court.
The High Court in its judgement had also upheld the August 4, 2011 order of the Central Information Commission (CIC) directing CPIO of the apex court to provide the information sought. The CIC order has also been challenged by the registry. The High Court while asking the Supreme Court registry to provide the information, had observed that “the period for which a case remains pending after arguments, is relevant for any citizen who desires to know about the pendency of cases before the apex court”.
It had also observed that the information was denied as it would require sifting through the data so available. The High Court, however, had refused to uphold the CIC’s order to the extent it required that the information sought be also placed in a public domain. Then 63-year-old Batra in his RTI application had in 2009 sought data of pending cases in which arguments have been heard between 2007- 2009 and judgements have been reserved.
The CPIO had rejected his plea by an order dated January 12, 2010 saying the data is not maintained by the registry in the manner as sought for by him. His appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA) was also dismissed and against the same he had moved CIC, which directed CPIO to provide the information.