Why a notification when there is a court order?

While it's still being worked out how to tackle the govt notification that states "public interest" be proved before giving information, the opinion on its reach is uniform. The media interpretation of the notification is that information need not be provided to those seeking personal information.

"It's a badly drafted notification which was not needed because whatever it states is already mentioned in the Act. On the one hand we have court orders that state public figures should give their personal (asset) details because people need to know, on the other hand, a notification states that they should not be," said Shailesh Gandhi, former central information commissioner.

It is because of this that the motives of the notification is being questioned. "The very first question that should be put to the government is that why does it keep bringing out circulars whenever there is a court order? Why a circular this time? The administration obviously saw this as a chance to save itself as something similar had been done by politicians. Politicians tried to save themselves by keeping ACB out, and officials want information about them safe guarded," said Vijay Kumbhar, whose queries had brought out the ACB circular.

"In fact, the Act states that no information can be denied to a person if it cannot be denied to the state legislature or parliament. The notification has been put out only to create impediments in the implementation of the RTI Act," said Bhaskar Prabhu, another RTI activist.