The office of CJI is distinct from the apex court

After expressing reservation in making public assets of its judges, the Supreme Court appears to be reluctant in revealing what action it has taken on a complaint of alleged misconduct against a High Court Judge. The apex court has approached the Delhi High Court against an order of Central Information Commission directing it to reveal information under the RTI Act on action taken by the Chief Justice of India on the complaint filed against Allahabad High Court Judge Sunil Ambwani. The CIC had on July 16 held that the office of CJI came within the purview of the transparency law and the apex court is under obligation to reveal the details of action taken on the complaint. It had rejected the plea of Supreme Court registry that the office of CJI is distinct from the apex court and cannot be said to be under the purview of the RTI Act. "The Institution and its head cannot be two distinct public authorities. They are one and the same. Information therefore available with CJI must be deemed to be available with the Supreme Court of India," Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibuallah had said. The Commission had passed the order on a plea of a 77-year old RTI applicant P K Dalmia who sought to know the fate of his complaint, filed with CJI, of alleged malpractices by Ambwani, the designated company judge, in the liquidation case of UP State Cement Corporation Limited.

"Loved reading this piece by Jithendra.H.J?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Join our Telegram group

Join our Whatsapp group