Supreme Court of India · 2025-01-28 · 2025 SCC OnLine SC 112
Collegium notings are transparent to the extent they concern public-office functioning.
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
|---|---|
| Decided | 2025-01-28 |
| Citation | 2025 SCC OnLine SC 112 |
| Bench | A, b, h, a, y, , S, ., , O, k, a, ,, , A, u, g, u, s, t, i, n, e, , G, e, o, r, g, e, , M, a, s, i, h, , J, J |
| Petitioner | Subhash Chandra Agarwal |
| Respondent | Secretary General, SC |
| RTI Act sections | §2(h), §8(1)(j) |
| Outcome | Applicant allowed |
Judicial appointments collegium correspondence is §4(1)(b) information; personal disclosures on asset declarations are severable.
Building on the 2019 Constitution-Bench ruling, administrative correspondence of the Chief Justice's office on collegium decisions is part of the public-authority record. Personal asset declarations are severable; functional notings on elevation, transfer and supersession are disclosable subject to §8(2) public-interest balancing.
CJI office, collegium, section 2(h), judicial transparency, severability
These rulings have the closest editorial ratio to this case — computed by tf-idf cosine similarity over ratio, keywords and Act sections. Useful starting points if you are researching the same point of law.
Editorial summary, not a certified report. The ratio here is an editorial compression. Before citing this ruling in a PIO order, FAA speaking order, or any appellate filing, verify against the full reported decision. RTI Wiki is not a legal service.
Editorial summary · last reviewed 21 April 2026.