Justices B Sudershan Reddy and SS Nijjar issued notices to registrars general (RGs) of all HCs, saying it was important since they keep getting such applications.
The Supreme Court (SC) began hearing on Monday an appeal by its registry against the central information commission’s (CIC’s) direction to divulge details regarding the promotion of certain high court (HC) judges to SC superseding others.
This is the first time since the inception of the RTI Act five years ago, that SC is hearing such a plea.
Justices B Sudershan Reddy and SS Nijjar issued notices to registrars general (RGs) of all HCs, saying it was important since they keep getting such applications.
The hearing, which is perceived to be a test case for SC to adjudicate on issues frequently raised by CIC, began on a day when Chandramauli Kumar Prasad was elevated to the top court.
The former Allahabad HC chief justice had hit the headlines when president Pratibha Patil had returned to the SC collegium the file recommending his promotion. Patil was concerned that some senior judges had been ignored in granting promotion to Prasad.
But the collegium headed by chief justice of India (CJI) KG Balakrishnan said the allegations were false, leaving no option for the president but to okay the appointment.
On December 4 last year, the apex court had stayed CIC’s November 25 order that appointment of judges was a “public activity” that could not be withheld from disclosure.
Therefore, CIC asked the SC registry to make public records relating to the appointment of HL Dattu, AK Ganguly and RM Lodha, who superseded senior judges AP Shah, AK Patnaik and VK Gupta.
Then Delhi high court chief justice Shah had headed the bench that upheld CIC’s order on assets disclosure. It held that “the judges of the Supreme Court hold independent office and there is no hierarchy in their judicial functions, which places them at a different plane than CJI”.
The bench stayed the operation of another CIC order directing CJI to divulge his communication with Madras high court judge R Reghupathy on alleged influence used by a Union minister to secure bail for a father-son accused.
Former CJIs JS Verma and VN Khare and lawyer Prashant Bhushan are among the legal pundits who have been raising brows at SC challenging CIC orders.
Attorney general Goolam E Vahanvati, who appeared for SC against CIC in the assets case, had sought a stay on the information commission’s directive.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}