Results 1 to 2 of 2
Thread: A Landmark Judgement
Views: 7084 | 09-01-07, 12:44 AM #1
- 10 Post(s)
- 3 Thread(s)
- 2 Post(s)
A Landmark Judgement
The CIC has ruled that any information to which the govt. has an access is to be disclosed, even if the organisation from which such an information emanates is neither funded nor controlled by the government, nor a public body. Here is the full story:
New Delhi, Jan 08: Ruling that the Council for the Indian School Certificate Examination (CISCE) was under the purview of Right To Information (RTI) Act, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has directed it to disclose certain information in response to an RTI application.
"...The commission felt that since the information could be accessed by the government, the respondents (CISCE) were obligated to disclose the information sought for by the appellant," said Information Commissioner O P Kejariwal in a recent order.
The commission's order came in view of a RTI appeal filed by one Ajay Jhuria, a resident of Mumbai, who sought certified copies of records and action taken against an official by CICSE authorities.
The CISCE had earlier rejected Ajay's application on the ground that it did not fell under the purview of the act.
Rejecting the contention of CISCE, the commission specified that the information could not excluded.
The commission although accepted its contention that it was neither funded nor controlled by government or any other public body, it added that any information to which the government has an access is to be disclosed.
Earlier Ajay in his application sought certified copies of record and action taken against one Francis Fanthome by the CISCE.
Failing to get a reply from the council, he approached the commission which then directed it to provide the information on the grounds that it was obliged to disclose information as per the act.
Zee News - CISCE under obligation to disclose details under RTI Act: CIC
› Find content similar to: A Landmark Judgement
09-01-07, 09:45 AM #2
Yes, indeed it might be the first time this has been evoked.
For earlier discussion see this thread:
or follow the tag of this thread.