Some Clarifications Requested Dear Members, I shall be grateful if some legal experts could kindly illuminate me on the following points: - Delhi HC bench noted that CICisnotacourtandcertainlynotabody whichexercisesplenaryjurisdiction. TheCIC isacreatureofthestatuteanditspowersandfunctionsarecircumscribedby thestatute. Itdoesnotexerciseanypoweroutsidethestatute. Querry: What is plenary jurisdiction and where is it defined. Section18(3)providesthattheInformationCommissionshall,whileinquiringintoanymatterunderthis section,havethesamepowersasarevestedinacivilcourtwhiletryingasuitundertheCodeofCivilProcedure,1908in respect of (a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of the persons and compelthemtogiveoralorwrittenevidenceonoathortoproducethe documents or things etc. How is a CIC bench exerecising such powers different than a civil court bench exercising these powers. - sarbajit roy wrote on 9 June, 2010: 12(4) is not an ENABLING provision to grant "autonomy" to CIC. It is a LIMITING provision which restricts the powers conferred on CIC conferred elsewhere in the Act (sect 18 .. 20). Querry: As per sec 12(4), the general superintendence, direction and management of the affairs of CIC shall vest with Chief Information Commissioner (ChIC) who shall be assisted by ICs and may exercise all powers and do all acts and things which may be done by CIC autonomously without being subjected to directions by any other authority under this act. What could Mr Sarabjit mean by his coments. In my opinion, sec 12(4) is quite clear, CIC is autonomous and fully empowred to make rules, regulations, standing orders, office orders etc (by whatever name they call it) within the domain prescribed by the act and the rules made by the govt and the competent authorities u/s 27 & 28 of the act. M K Singhal
