In a significant ruling, the Tamil Nadu Information Commission has permitted a petitioner to inspect registers maintained by the district and its subordinate courts, thereby setting aside the contention that the Madras High Court alone had to the right to do so.
The Commission made the decision while disposing of the plea of Giles Ravichandran who petitioned the Public Information Commissioner (PIO), Office of the Principal District Judge, Madurai, to “inspect the register containing the list of succession original petitions under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, for 1991 and 1992 of the District Court, Sub-Court and Munsif Court at Madurai.”
In his reply, the PIO rejected the request on the grounds that the Madras High Court alone was the competent authority to inspect the registers of the District Court, and the Principal District Judge, Madurai, was the competent authority to inspect the registers of the Sub-Court and the Munsif Court at Madurai.
The petitioner was asked to submit an application under the Right to Information Act to the Registrar-General of the Madras High Court and obtain permission if he still intended to inspect the registers. “No individual has any right to inspect the registers, as seeking in your petition under the Right to Information Act, 2005, without the permission of the Madras High Court,” the PIO said. Claiming that an appeal sent to the Registrar-General of the High Court did not elicit any response, the petitioner filed his second appeal before the Information Commission.
State Chief Information Commissioner K. Ramanujam ruled that the PIO’s stand was not sustainable. “Under Section 2(j) of the Act, right to information includes the right of inspection of work, documents and records. The term ‘inspection’ here means perusal, and it is not in the nature of an inspection by a superior official.”
He said the rejection of the petitioner’s request was not sustainable. Requesting the PIO to grant permission for perusal of the records mentioned by the petitioner, Mr. Ramanujam said the petitioner might also be allowed to take notes and copies of specific pages/documents requested by him.
Mr. Ramanujam said the perusal should be done under the supervision of the PIO without disturbing the functioning of the office. The order should be complied with before June 15.
