RE: [HumJanenge] Centre must add purpose clause to RTI Act

Dear Sri Sarbajit ji,

Statutes mean what they say, not what may follow from them. If the
High Court has to make rules in respect of RTI Act, they must be made within
the four corners of RTI Act. The Court cannot make Rule to demand
disclosure of reason, because it would be ultra vires of Section 6(2); the
same would apply to Governments. The Parliament will have to amend Section
6(2) of the Act; but that may be violative of the Fundamental Right
independently of RTI Act. On second thoughts, it may be permissible for
Parliament to amend Section 6(2) and provide for reason; but that would be
violative of the 'spirit' of FR/RTI Act which may not be 'illegal' but
certainly would be 'ill-advised'. The Court cannot question the wisdom of
legislature. After all, RTI Act does provide for exceptions in Section 8
and elsewhere. The 'reason' issue will certainly be open to question.

Regards,
KN

From the Desk of :

Justice Kamleshwar Nath
Retd.
: Up-Lokayukta ( Karnataka ), Vice Chairman - C.A.T ( Allahbad ),
Judge - High Court ( Lucknow & Allahbad )
Address
:
`Gunjan', C - 105, Niralanagar, Lucknow : 226 020. Uttar Pradesh, India
Phone(s)
Res. :
Mob. :
+91-522-2789033 & +91-522-4016459
+91-9415010746

-----Original Message-----
From: humjanenge@googlegroups.com [mailto:humjanenge@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Sarbajit Roy
Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2011 1:37 PM
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Centre must add purpose clause to RTI Act

Sir

Art 225 actually clarifies that the pre-Constitutional powers of the
EXISTING High Courts (incl. their powers to frame their rules) are
henceforth (26 Jan 1950) subject to the Constitution and any laws made
under the Constitution (which includes RTI Act).

You are correct Sir that the rules I referred to concern enforcement
of Fundamental Rights which now includes the Right to Information. My
point was that if a High Court can lawfully restrict citizens from
filing Writs by demanding all kinds of personal information and
reasons for filing writs, then by analogy the State can do so too when
it comes to giving effect to a particular right AT THE APPELLATE STAGE
(since the application stage faces a legal bar in the RTI Act)

Sarbajit

On 2/25/11, Justice Kamleshwar Nath <justicekn@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Sri Sarbajit,
>
> Thanks. Rules of the Bombay High Court seem to concern Petitions filed in
> the High Court under Writ Jurisdiction for enforcement of Fundamental
> Rights. High Court's power to frame Rules for its own business are
contained
> in Article 225 of the Constitution. That has nothing to do with RTI Act.
>
> It is correct that I retired long ago (1988) and there may be laws or
their
> interpretation of which I may not be aware. That is why I wished to have
> latest information from you.
>
> Thanking you again and with regards,
>
> KN