Source: Delhi High Court

Why in News?

The Delhi High Court recent observation in matter of Union of India v. Ram Gopal Dixit regarding the jurisdiction of the Central Information Commission (CIC) over the utilization of funds under the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS) has garnered attention.

• Justice Subramonium Prasad observation that the Central Information Commission (CIC) lacks jurisdiction to remark on the utilization of funds by Members of Parliament under the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS).

What was the Background of Union of India v. Ram Gopal Dixit?

• The Ram Gopal Dixit (Respondent) had submitted an RTI application on 26.09.2016 to the Lok Sabha's CPIO seeking various information, including details regarding the work initiated, pending, and completed by Sh. Rajesh Diwakar, the then Member of Parliament representing Hathras Constituency, and information on MPLADS fund utilization and works in Northeastern Railway.
• A reply to the RTI application was provided on 21.10.2016.
• Dissatisfied with the response, the Respondent pursued an appeal and subsequently filed a Second Appeal before the CIC.
• The Union of India, through the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, has filed a writ petition challenging the Orders issued by the Central Information Commission (CIC) in Appeal.
  • The Petitioner contends that the CIC overstepped its jurisdiction by commenting on the actions of Members of Parliament in spending MPLADS funds, an area purportedly beyond the CIC's purview.
  • The Petitioner asserts that the CIC should have limited its examination to matters directly related to the RTI application and refrained from delving into issues beyond its scope.
• The central argument of the Petitioner's case revolves around the contention that the CIC's involvement in scrutinizing the utilization of MPLADS funds by MPs encroached upon a domain beyond its statutory authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The Delhi High Court, declared that the CIC lacks jurisdiction to scrutinize the utilization of funds allocated to Members of Parliament under the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS).

Court Stated that in perusal of Section 18 of the Right to information Act ,2005 (RTI) reveals that the Ld. CIC can only deal with issues relating to the information sought for under the RTI Act or any other issue which leads to dissipation of information as sought for by the Applicant.

• • The Ld. CIC has no jurisdiction to comment adversely upon the functioning of any public authority
• The court emphasized that the ambit of the RTI Act is confined to ensuring access to information under the control of public authorities, rather than examine assessments of fund usage.
  • It maintained that the CIC's purview should be limited to addressing the queries raised in the RTI application or other related aspects.
  • While affirming that the CIC cannot make adverse comments on the functioning of public authorities, the court expunged remarks made by the CIC regarding the utilization of MPLADS funds by Members of Parliament.
• CIC also directed public authority under Section 19(8)(a)(iii) of the RTI Act, for publication of detailed fund allocation information categorized by Member of Parliament, constituency, and specific projects.

What is the RTI Act?

• About:
  • The RTI Act, or the Right to Information Act, is legislation enacted by the Government of India in 2005.
  • Its primary objective is to promote transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities by providing citizens with the right to access information held by these authorities.
  • Under the RTI Act, any citizen of India can request information from a public authority, and the authority is obligated to provide the requested information within a specified time frame.
  • This law is instrumental in empowering citizens to hold the government and its agencies accountable for their actions and decisions.
• Objective of RTI Act
  • To promote transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities.
  • To provide citizens with the right to access information held by the authorities.
  • To empower citizens to participate more effectively in the governance process, thereby strengthening democratic principles.
  • To facilitate greater accountability of the government and reduces corruption by ensuring that information is readily available to the public.

What is CIC under RTI Act?

• About:
  • The Central Information Commission (CIC) is a statutory body established under the Right to Information (RTI) Act of 2005 in India.
  • It is responsible for ensuring the effective implementation of the RTI Act and adjudicating appeals and complaints regarding the right to information.
  • The CIC acts as the highest appellate authority in matters related to the RTI Act, ensuring that public authorities comply with the provisions of the law and promote transparency and accountability in government functioning.
• Power and Function of CIC under Section 18 of RTI 2005:
  • Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission shall receive and inquire into a complaint from anyone.
    • who has been unable to submit a request to a Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, either by reason that no such officer has been appointed under this Act, or because the Central Assistant Public Information Officer or State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has refused to accept his or her application for information or appeal under this Act for forwarding the same to the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer or Senior Officer specified in sub-section (1) of section 19 or the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be;
      • who has been refused access to any information requested under this Act;
      • who has not been given a response to a request for information or access to information within the time limit specified under this Act
      • who has been required to pay an amount of fee which he or she considers unreasonable;
      • who believes that he or she has been given incomplete, misleading or false information under this Act;
  • in respect of any other matter relating to requesting or obtaining access to records under this Act.
  • Where the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to inquire into the matter, it may initiate an inquiry in respect thereof.
  • The Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall, while inquiring into any matter under this section, have the same powers as are vested in a civil Court while trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in respect of the following matters, namely:
    • summoning and enforcing the attendance of persons and compel them to give oral or written evidence on oath and to produce the documents or things;
    • requiring the discovery and inspection of documents;
    • receiving evidence on affidavit;
    • requisitioning any public record or copies thereof from any Court or office;
    • issuing summons for examination of witnesses or documents;
    • any other matter which may be prescribed.
  • Notwithstanding anything inconsistent contained in any other Act of Parliament or State Legislature, as the case may be, the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may, during the inquiry of any complaint under this Act, examine any record to which this Act applies which is under the control of the public authority, and no such record may be withheld from it on any grounds.