Dear Shri Jam On 7 Mar 2010 the registry of Supreme court challenged order of bench of Delhi high court declaring office of the CJI "public authority" under RTI. Notice was issued after that to applicant S.C.Agarwall to reply. Case is still sub-judice. Court outsiders are speculating that Registry did not ask for stay so CJI has accepted the High court order. Actually the legal position is that court cannot grant itself relief in its own cause. So baba check your own facts.
R S Pabbi On 5/27/10, C K Jam <[email protected]> wrote: > Arey baba, check your facts before filing reports (specially with the BBC). > Where is the question of "leverage", when the SC itself has already agreed > that the office of the CJI is a PA as defined in Sec 2(h) of the RTI Act ? > "Court insiders" are giving bogus information or are sleeping. > > RTIwanted > > --- On Wed, 5/26/10, ashish kr1965 <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: ashish kr1965 <[email protected]> > Subject: [rti_india] Fwd: [Indiarti] CIC to approach SC as ICs refuse to > work > To: [email protected], [email protected] > Date: Wednesday, May 26, 2010, 4:14 PM > > Court insiders expect that the Supreme Court will > thus get considerable leverage over the CIC in another high profile CIC > decision decided by a bench of only 3 Information Commissioners which > held the Chief Justice of India to be a public authority under the RTI > law. >
