Section 4(1)(a) of RTI Act applies only for the records available with public authority
8 Nov, 2012Background
The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act with the High Court of Chattisgarh seeking details about the number of letter petitions and suo motu cases heard and disposed of by the Chhattisgarh High Court since its inception. The Public Information Officer (PIO) informed the appellant that the desired information was not maintained in the manner in which it had been sought and that it would have to be collected by searching through thousands of case files and something which was beyond the duty cast on the PIO under the RTI Act.
Proceeding
During the hearing before the Central Information Commission (CIC), the appellant submitted that such information should be maintained by the High Court in terms of section 4(1)(a) Every public authority shall maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and the form which facilitates the right to information under this Act and ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerised are, within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources, computerised and connected through a network all over the country on different systems so that access to such records is facilitated; Every public authority shall maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and the form which facilitates the right to information under this Act and ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerised are, within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources, computerised and connected through a network all over the country on different systems so that access to such records is facilitated; of the RTI Act. He argued that the High Court should have implemented the provisions of this section and kept all its records properly catalogued and indexed so that retrieval of such information would have become easier. The respondent submitted that the Chhattisgarh High Court had scrupulously implemented the provisions of the above section and all such information was available in the public domain. He further contended that the relevant High Court Rules did not require any special cataloguing or indexing of the letter petition and suo motu cases and so such statistical details were not separately maintained.
View of CIC
The Commission observed that implication of section 4(1)(a) Every public authority shall maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and the form which facilitates the right to information under this Act and ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerised are, within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources, computerised and connected through a network all over the country on different systems so that access to such records is facilitated; Every public authority shall maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and the form which facilitates the right to information under this Act and ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerised are, within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources, computerised and connected through a network all over the country on different systems so that access to such records is facilitated; is limited to the available records. It does not require any public authority to create any particular classification of records other than what is usually maintained by it. If the High Court does not have a separate classification for the type of cases about which the appellant wants to know, it cannot be compelled to create such classification under the above subsection. The Commission further observed that only a few letter petitions were taken up by the High Court every year for hearing and disposal. If the total number of such cases taken up during the year in public interest is not very large, it may be possible to create a classification in the computer database for such cases so that statistical details about such cases could be easily compiled and disclosed in the public domain in the same manner as the details of writ petitions and public interest litigations are classified and disclosed. The CIC advised the competent authority in the High Court to consider the possibility of including such information in the computerized database for the benefit of the general public so that the disclosure of such information would go a long way in creating an informed citizenry.
Citation: Mr. Raj Kumar Gupt v. High Court of Chattisgarh in File No.CIC/SM/A/2012/000698
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2012/CIC/783
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission