rules:sc
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionNext revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
rules:sc [2015/09/05 05:25] – Shrawan | rules:sc [2015/09/05 05:51] – Shrawan | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====== Supreme Court of India ====== | ====== Supreme Court of India ====== | ||
{{tag> | {{tag> | ||
+ | {{: | ||
**Right to Information Act, 2005** | **Right to Information Act, 2005** | ||
Line 51: | Line 52: | ||
- [[http:// | - [[http:// | ||
- [[http:// | - [[http:// | ||
- | - [[http:// | ||
Analysis of Supreme Court RTI Rules and Procedure | Analysis of Supreme Court RTI Rules and Procedure | ||
Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
- On 10th November 2007, Subhash Chandra Agrawal filed an RTI request with the SC asking for information concerning declaration of assets by Supreme Court Judges, among other things. The PIO denied the request, claiming he did not hold the information. Agrawal filed a first appeal asking that his application may be transferred to the Public Authority holding the information. The Registrar asked the PIO to re-consider the request, but he denied the information again. Agrawal moved the Central Information Commission (CIC) which in January 2009, asked the PIO to furnish the information [PDF].The SC challenged this order twice before the Delhi High Court (HC) even as it made some information about judges’ assets public on its website, but the HC upheld the CIC’s ruling. Read the decision [[http:// | - On 10th November 2007, Subhash Chandra Agrawal filed an RTI request with the SC asking for information concerning declaration of assets by Supreme Court Judges, among other things. The PIO denied the request, claiming he did not hold the information. Agrawal filed a first appeal asking that his application may be transferred to the Public Authority holding the information. The Registrar asked the PIO to re-consider the request, but he denied the information again. Agrawal moved the Central Information Commission (CIC) which in January 2009, asked the PIO to furnish the information [PDF].The SC challenged this order twice before the Delhi High Court (HC) even as it made some information about judges’ assets public on its website, but the HC upheld the CIC’s ruling. Read the decision [[http:// | ||
- On 20th February 2008, Satnam Singh, a prisoner in Ludhiana’s Central Jail sent a Right to Information (RTI) request to the Supreme Court (SC) asking for a copy of its guidelines on police reforms. The Public Information Officer (PIO) of the SC denied the request and referred Singh to the SC website. Singh filed a first appeal pointing out that as a prisoner, he had no access to a computer, and that, by not sending him the information, | - On 20th February 2008, Satnam Singh, a prisoner in Ludhiana’s Central Jail sent a Right to Information (RTI) request to the Supreme Court (SC) asking for a copy of its guidelines on police reforms. The Public Information Officer (PIO) of the SC denied the request and referred Singh to the SC website. Singh filed a first appeal pointing out that as a prisoner, he had no access to a computer, and that, by not sending him the information, | ||
- | - | + | - The Supreme Court Rules 1966 Rule XII {{: |
+ | - [[http:// | ||
+ | - The Commission respectfully disagrees with the decision of the then Chief Information Commissioner that the PIO, Supreme Court may choose to deny the information sought under the RTI Act and ask an applicant to apply for information under Order XII of the SC Rules.[[http:// | ||
+ | - [[http:// |
rules/sc.txt · Last modified: 2018/03/06 15:06 by Shrawan