The Delhi High Court on Wednesday declined to entertain a public interest petition seeking enhanced public and media access to hearings of the Central Information Commission (CIC) under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.
[Saurav Das & Ors v Central Information Commission]
A Division Bench of Delhi HC comprised Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal. They held that the petitioners should first make appropriate representations to the CIC. The Supreme Court of India is already addressing related issues concerning virtual access to hearings.
The petition, filed by journalists Saurav Das, Betwa Sharma, Vinita Deshmukh, Kunal Rajnikant Purohit, and Mohit M Rao, requested directions from the High Court to mandate open access to CIC hearings—either physically or virtually—without the need for prior permission or special authorization.
In its ruling, the Delhi High Court clarified:
“Regarding prayer for permitting entry to the general public and journalists physically, we permit the petitioners to represent their cause to the CIC, which shall take an appropriate decision expeditiously.”
The Court further noted that the issue of virtual access to CIC proceedings is sub judice before the Supreme Court. The petitioners were advised to join those pending proceedings to avoid multiplicity of litigation.
“We are of the opinion that the petitioners shall be better advised to approach the Supreme Court to avoid multiplicity of proceedings,” the Bench observed.
Connect with us on Instagram – X – LinkedIn
The petitioners stated that they had submitted a formal representation to the CIC. This was done on July 24, 2024. They were seeking broader public access to hearings. However, the lack of response prompted them to move the High Court.
In their plea, the petitioners argued that the CIC is a quasi-judicial body. It must uphold the principles of transparency and public accountability that the RTI Act embodies. They contended that in-camera proceedings hinder civic participation and dilute institutional accountability.
The plea was filed through Advocates N Sai Vinod, Madhav Aggarwal, and Kanu Garg.
The Court disposed of the matter. It directed the petitioners to pursue their claims before the CIC. The Supreme Court is already examining similar concerns regarding transparency in quasi-judicial proceedings.
Also Read
Kerala High Court Slams GST Authorities for Illegal Vehicle Confiscation via WhatsApp Notice
Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance of ED Summons to Lawyers
