The inner workings of the state cabinet will now be accessible to citizens through the Right to Information Act, 2005, the state information commission has ruled.
The inner workings of the state cabinet will now be accessible to citizens through the Right to Information Act, 2005, the state information commission has ruled. These include cabinet notes, decisions taken, and the reasons behind them.
Cabinet notes are given to the ministers before a cabinet meeting. They include remarks and comprehensive reports from finance, law and judiciary departments and decisions are taken based on them. The landmark order, dated April 29, came after a full-bench hearing of six information commissioners of the state information commission. However, two commissioners dissented on it.
The precedent-setting order was delivered on an RTI application filed by Ulhasnagar resident Archana Gawda. The application was made in 2007, when Gawda had sought information related to the repealing of the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act (ULCR) by the state cabinet. The state government had repealed the much-debated Act two months prior to her application.
Both the chief secretary’s office and the urban development (UD) department, which deal with the information, had denied it citing various reasons — information being exempted under section 8(1) (j) clause of the RTI Act that prohibits disclosure of personal information; confidential and secrecy clause in the rules of business that are provided for under section 166 (3) of the Constitution; and the secrecy oath taken by the ministers that do not allow such documents to be made public. They even stated that since a government resolution is issued after the decision, the details should not be provided.
The four commissioners who agreed to give the details stated that since the information is not of personal nature, it cannot be kept secret. For the other two arguments, the four commissioners struck down the order saying that the information cannot be kept secret because the matter is over. The dissenting commissioners agreed with the argument presented by the public information officers and the first appellate authority of the respective departments.
){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}