Copy of caveat alongwith receipt evidence of dispatch of the caveat to caveatee was sought - CIC: Certified copies of documents on the judicial side to be obtained through the mechanism provided under the Supreme Court Rules and not under the RTI Act 2005
16 Dec, 2020Information sought and background of the case:
(1) CIC/SCOFI/A/2019/638912
(2) CIC/SCOFI/C/2018/636112
The Complainant/Appellant filed an RTI application dated 05.10.2018 seeking copy of caveat no 7977-2018, 4886-2018, 1781-2018, 1783-2018, 7373-2017, 7 22 The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923), and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act. 3-2017 and 4103-2017 alongwith receipt evidence of dispatch of the caveat to caveatee filed by caveator through their counsel Apoorv Kurup in which he is a caveatee.
The CPIO, Addl. Registrar vide letter dated 12.12.2018 informed the Complainant/Appellant that he can obtain documents/record/judgments by moving an application under Order XIII Rule 1 of Supreme Court Rules, 2013 and other relevant provisions of the said Rule.
Dissatisfied with the response from the PIO, Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 27.12.2018. The FAA, vide order dated 18.01.2019 while relying on the decision of the Commission in Rakesh Kumar Gupta vs Supreme Court of India, CIC/WB/A/2009/000553 dated 30.08.2010; Amarjit Singh vs Supreme Court of India CIC/SM/A/2011/000775 dated 15.03.2012; Shaji MK vs Supreme Court of India; CIC/SM/A/2011/000750 dated 15.03.2012 and the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in The Registrar, Supreme Court of India vs R. S. Misra dated 21.112017 in WP (C) 3530/2011 and upheld the reply of CPIO.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Complainant/Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, audio hearings were scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.
The Appellant/ Complainant participated in the hearing on being contacted on his telephone. While acknowledging the receipt of a reply from the CPIO/ FAA, the Appellant/ Complainant stated that the information sought was incorrectly denied to him. While referring to his Second Appeal, the Appellant argued that denial of information was inconsistent with Section 22 The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923), and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act. of the RTI Act, 2005/ He also stated that it is the prerogative of a citizen to choose the most efficacious and convenient way of seeking the information. In support of his contention, he referred to the decisions of the Commission CIC/WB/A/2008/01010/SG/ 22 The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923), and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act. 28 and Mr. R. S. Misra vs. CPIOCIC/SM/A/2011/000237/SG/12351 dated May 11, 2011 Mr. R. S. Misra vs. CPIO, Supreme Court.
The Respondent is represented by Shri Ajay Agrawal, Addl Registrar and PIO and Shri Deepak Goel, Advocate through audio conference. Shri Agrawal stated that the RTI application was transferred to them by the M/o Law and Justice which resulted in the delay in replying to the same. Referring to the reply of the CPIO/ FAA, he stated that the Appellant is seeking judicial records which can be obtained by him as per the provisions of Order XIII Rule 1 of Supreme Court Rules, 2013 and other relevant provisions of the said Rules. He referred to a recent decision of the Commission in CIC/SCOFI/A/2018/631839 –BJ dated 24.07.2020 which dealt with similar issues and the decision pronounced by the Commission in the said matter was res integra. He specifically referred to the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of The Registrar, Supreme Court of India vs R. S. Misra dated 21.112017 in WP (C) 3530/2011 and the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, the bench comprising Justices R. Banumathi, A.S. Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy, in the case of Chief Information Commissioner Vs. High Court of Gujarat and Another in CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).1966-1967 OF 2020(Arising out of SLP(C) No.5840 of 2015) dated 04thMarch, 2020 in support of their contentions.
DECISION
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the both the parties and in the light of the judgements of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of The Registrar, Supreme Court of India vs R. S. Misra dated 21.112017 in WP (C) 3530/2011 and the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, , in Chief Information Commissioner Vs. High Court of Gujarat and Another in CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).1966-1967 OF 2020(Arising out of SLP(C) No.5840 of 2015) dated 04thMarch, 2020 as also the earlier decision pronounced by the Commission in CIC/SCOFI/A/2018/631839 –BJ dated 24.07.2020, the Commission finds that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 is provided by the Respondent. Moreover, the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chief Information Commissioner Vs. High Court of Gujarat and Another clearly states that certified copies of documents on the judicial side is to be obtained through the mechanism provided under the Supreme Court Rules and the provisions of the RTI Act shall not be resorted to. Furthermore, the Appellant/ Complainant could not justify existence of any malafide intent in denying him the information. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is warranted in the instant matter.
With the abovementioned observation, the instant Second Appeal/ Complaint stands disposed off accordingly.
Y. K. Sinha
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Jaigopal Soni v. Supreme Court of India in Complaint/Appeal No. CIC/SCOFI/A/2019/638912 CIC/SCOFI/C/2018/636112, Date of Decision: 29.10.2020