Namit Sharma v. Union of India

Qualification & composition of Information Commissions revisited; two-member bench rule later relaxed.

Information Commissioner appointments require judicial benches; subsequently diluted on review.

Information Commissions exercise quasi-judicial functions; initial ruling required judicial-benched two-member panels. Review in 2013 relaxed the strict judicial-qualification requirement.

Information Commission, appointment, qualifications, §12, §15

• Union of India v. Namit Sharma (Review) (SC 2013)
• Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India (SC 2019)

This ruling has been overruled, modified, or substantially diluted by later authority. See:-

• Union of India v. Namit Sharma (Review) (SC 2013)

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.

• Union of India v. Namit Sharma (Review) (SC 2013)
• Khanapuram Gandaiah v. Administrative Officer (SC 2010)
• Natural justice in Information Commission hearings (SC 2020)
• Judicial Academies under RTI — CIC (CIC 2020)
• Judicial-delay records — SC (SC 2023)

• All Supreme Court of India rulings in the corpus
• All RTI cases turning on §12
• All RTI cases turning on §15
• All RTI cases turning on §16
• All landmark rulings
• Full case-law search
• Case-Law Database — overview
• PIO RTI Reply Guide
• The RTI Act, 2005 — annotated

Editorial summary · last reviewed 21 April 2026.