Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

In one case, SC responds to RTI request

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • While a Delhi High Court judge is yet to decide whether the apex court should make public its judges’ assets, Attorney General (AG) G E Vahanvati — in a surprise turn of events — agreed before Justice Sanjiv Khanna to reveal information on what action the Chief Justice of India (CJI) took on complaints filed against a sitting Allahabad High Court judge.

    The AG’s submission on behalf of the apex court came even as the Judges’ Assets Bill was deferred due to opposition for its proposal to keep judges’ assets outside the purview of the RTI.

    The debate as to whether the apex court comes under the RTI purview started on January 6, 2009 when the Central Information Commission (CIC), on a petition filed by applicant S C Agarwal, decided that Supreme Court judges were indeed obliged to disclose their assets to the public.

    The CIC decision was challenged in the Delhi High Court and is currently reserved for final orders.

    Ads by Google

    The Supreme Court’s position under the RTI again came under the lens recently with the apex court moving the High Court against a second CIC order on July 16 — this time on an appeal by applicant P K Dalmia — which directed the apex court to reveal the action taken by the CJI against the sitting Allahabad judge.

    The Attorney General submitted that the court was willing to share what the CJI did with Dalmia’s complaints, but was careful to underline the fact that Tuesday’s development should not be construed as an acceptance of the “correctness” of the CIC decisions.

    ... contd.

    Next12
    There can be no equality in this worldBy: HR Vaish | 13-Aug-2009 Reply | Forward George Orwell:"Everybody is equal but some are more equal than others". Judges are like you and me, part of the same Society. A king likes a bigger empire, crime helps grow the police force, why deny growth to judges by expediting trials? We help near
    Judiciary and disclosureBy: N Desai | 13-Aug-2009 Reply | Forward As son in law of a former Supreme Court Judge of India, I have observed extra ordinary commitment and honesty higher courts judges exercise.Without doubt, there will be some who are prone to moral weaknesses.By expecting Higher court judges to scrutiny by bureaucrats, we are undermining the basic tenet of judicial independence.Indian constitution, like most other democracies provide special status to judges for a reason. It is pre-requisite for them to their jobs. Most of these judges could have made millions a month by being lawyers.Personally, I amused by comments from one of the comments about ‘so called verdicts’. Isn’t a judges job to pass verdicts ? Social status comes with all important roles in society, be it a judge, a IAS officer or a successful industrialist.
    A TRANSPARENT JUDICIARY:NEED OF THE HOURBy: Prabir | 12-Aug-2009 Reply | Forward IT IS AN IRONY THAT THE JUDICIARY APPEARS TO SEEK IMMUNITY FROM TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY EVEN IF THE SAME JUDICIARY, THROUGH ITS LAUDABLE ACTIVISM, HAS ACTED AS A CRUSADER AS FAR AS THE PROBITY IN PUBLIC LIFE AND THE CITIZEN'S RIGHT TO KNOW ARE CONCERNED.LIKE OTHER OCCUPANTS OF THE AUGUST CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICES JUDGES ARE ALSO PUBLIC SERVANTS AND LIKE ALL PUBLIC SERVANTS THEY SHOULD ALSO BE SUBJECTED TO PUBLIC SCRUTINY.INDEPENDENCE DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN IMMUNITY.
    Supreme Court Judges lack willingness to fight corruptionBy: Anurita | 12-Aug-2009 Reply | Forward Most Judges in Supreme Court and High Courts do not have any willingness to fight corruption. They are more happy in taking no action on petitions and cases. All their attention is on evaluating and enjoying their 'social status' and the power that they wield to pass strictures and so called 'verdicts'.It will not be unfair to say that the level of corruption (especially moral) in Indian Judiciary is as high as that in any othe government department. However, Judiciary enjoys the status of being 'immune' from all checks and controls.Judges prefer not to take action and they have a 'right' to do so. This only shows their moral corruption and their tacit support for the corruption.
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.