The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to examine a petition filed by parliamentarian Jairam Ramesh challenging the amendments made to the Right to Information Act in 2019 which gives the government the power to decide the tenure, salaries and service terms of the Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners according to its “whims and fancies”.
A Bench led by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud issued formal notice to the government on the petition filed by Mr. Ramesh, through advocate Sunil Fernandes. The petition contended that the RTI Amendment Act of 2019 and its Rules cripple the objectivity and independence of the Central Information Commission (CIC), the top adjudicatory body under the Act, by bringing it under the yoke of the government.
The very purpose of the Act, which is “a salutary piece of legislation aimed at promoting transparency in public administration and empowering the common citizen”, is denuded when the salaries and tenure of the Information Commissioners depend on the sheer pleasure of the government. The government and its various agencies are parties in every case filed before the CIC.
“The decision of the Central government is binding upon the Information Commissioners. This allows unbridled and uncanalised discretionary power to the Central government that jeopardises the independence of Information Commissioners. Given that post-retirement benefits, pensions and allowances are not explicitly in these rules, the Central government is granted absolute power to change these from time to time,” the petition said.
The Amendment Act received the President’s assent on August 1, 2019. Mr. Ramesh has challenged the various amendments, including the ones which change the earlier fixed tenure of five years for Central and States’ Information Commissioners to “a tenure to be prescribed by the Central Government.”
Similarly, the petition has challenged Section 3(c) of the Amendment Act by which the Centre has “absolute powers” to prescribe the salaries, allowances and terms and conditions of the State Information Commissioners. Their salaries were previously fixed on par with that of Election Commissioners and State Chief Secretaries.
“The ostensible reason for such amendments is ‘rationalising’ the service conditions,” the petition said.
