New Delhi: Delhi High Court was on Tuesday moved by an RTI applicant challenging its order exempting medical reimbursements of Supreme Court judges from disclosure under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The petition, which was listed before a bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, was not taken up as the bench did not assemble. The petition has sought setting aside of the High Court's December 19, 2014, order of a single judge who had held that disclosure of the medical reimbursements would not serve any public interest and was thus exempt from the Act's purview.
The court had also held that the information sought was of a personal nature and held the Central Information Commission's (CIC) order as "erroneous". The petitioner, Subhash Chandra Agarwal, has contended that "salaries, pensions and allowances payable to or in respect of judges of Supreme Court are to be charged under the Consolidated Fund of India", as per the Constitution.
"Therefore, source of reimbursement money of the medical bills of Supreme Court judges comes from the hard-earned money of citizens as taxpayers," the petition filed through advocate Prashant Bhushan said.
Agarwal has also contended that "information pertaining to expenditure of public money on public servants cannot be exempted from disclosure under RTI". He said that he has not sought information regarding the illness or medical treatment of the judges, but only the amount spent on the same.
He also sought an order directing the apex court registry to comply with the Central Information Commission's (CIC) February 2012 order directing them to provide the information sought by him. CIC had passed its order on Agarwal's plea against the apex court's response that it does not keep records of medical reimbursement of individual judges and declining to furnish him the information sought by him under the transparency law.
The Commission had in 2010, while asking the apex court's registry to make arrangements to maintain details of medical reimbursement made to judges, specified that the same be maintained in digital format so that their retrieval and disclosure could be easier.
However, the apex court had refused, citing a stay by the Delhi High Court in a similar case, prompting Agarwal to once again approach CIC. In its second order of 2012, CIC directed the apex court to place the order before the Secretary General of the Supreme Court so that he can ensure its compliance.
It is against this order that the apex court registry had moved the High Court in appeal. The High Court, while allowing the appeal, had said that "information relating to the medical records would be personal information which is exempt from disclosure under the Act".
"The medical bills would indicate the treatment and/or medicines required by individuals and this would clearly be an invasion of the privacy," it had said.
Comments
0 comment