RTI| Links For Availing Option Of Hybrid Hearing Be Stipulated In Daily Cause List Of Information Commissions By Dec 31: SC Directs SICs
The Supreme Court has directed the SICs i.e., State Information Commissioners that the links for availing of the option of hybrid mode of hearing shall be stipulated in the daily cause list of the Information Commissions across the country by December 31, 2023.
The petitioner in this case had filed a writ petition seeking directions for the better functioning of SICs, under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act). It was stated in the petition that SICs along with CIC play a pivotal role in the proper implementation of the RTI Act, however, most of the SICs are located in the capital cities of the States and conduct proceedings physically.
The Bench comprising CJI D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra said, “… we are of the considered view that access to the Information Commissions is integral to securing the right to information, which is a necessary concomitant of right to equality under Article 14, the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, and the right to life under Article 21. Accordingly, we direct that all SICs across the country must provide hybrid modes of hearing to all litigants for the hearing of complaints as well as appeals. All SICs must provide an option for availing of a hybrid mode of hearing which shall be at the discretion of the applicant, or as the case may be, the appellant. The links for availing of the option must be stipulated in the daily cause list of the Information Commissions across the country. This shall be operationalized no later than by 31 December 2023.”
The Bench observed that the transcendental effect of technology is not only to further the constitutional right of individuals to access justice, but it also strengthens the rule of law and democracy.
Advocate Kishan Chand Jain (petitioner) appeared in person while Additional Solicitor General K.M. Nataraj appeared for the respondents.
The petitioner asserted that physically hearings impose prohibitive costs on applicants and appellants, especially those living in the remote areas, as they have to travel long distances to approach the SICs. He stated that such bottlenecks in the functioning of the SICs deprive applicants and appellants from effectively exercising their right to information. Therefore, the petitioner urged that the SICs should allow the option of virtual hearings along with physical hearings. He asserted that it is the legislative intention of Parliament in enacting the RTI Act to provide information to applicants at a reasonable expense. It was further asserted that most SICs do not have the facility of online filing of RTI appeals and complaints similar to the CIC. Moreover, the petitioner urged that the SICs should adopt a user-friendly digital portal to make the functioning of the SICs more effective and productive.
Hence, the petitioner sought the following reliefs:
(i) SICs should hear complaints as well as second appeals by giving the option of both, physical and virtual hearing through a digital platform and the State Governments must support the SICs financially and technically to conduct virtual hearings;
(ii) SICs must update and have self-contained digital portals with online facilities for: (a) filing RTI complaints and appeals; (b) showing the case status of pending/decided matters; (c) uploading daily orders and judgments; (d) uploading cause lists; and (e) uploading annual reports under Section 25 in line with Section 4(2).
(iii) SICs must be directed to dispose of the complaints within a fixed time frame, preferably within four months;
(iv) Norms be set up for disposal of a stipulated number of cases per working day by every Information Commissioner;
(v) SICs should prepare annual reports on the implementation of the provisions of the 2005 Act and provide them to the State Government under Section 25(1); and
(vi) SICs should ensure the imposition and recovery of penalties from erring information officers according to Section 20(1).
The Supreme Court in view of the above submissions noted, “Access to justice is a right of constitutional purport which signifies that individuals have effective means to approach legal institutions to seek appropriate legal remedies. The ability to access legal institutions empowers individuals to understand and exercise their legal and constitutional rights. Access to justice enhances the quality of human life and, therefore, is an important facet of right to life under Article 21.”
The Court said that Article 39A of the Constitution recognizes the rights of citizens to equal justice and free legal aid and while reading Articles 14, 21, and 39A harmoniously, it is evident that is the constitutional duty of the organs of the state to provide individuals with the means of access to justice in an effective and efficient manner.
“Particularly, it is duty of the Government to raise the standards of infrastructure by adopting technology to make our institutional processes accessible and inclusive”, added the Court.
Furthermore, the Court noted that it is a constitutional duty of every adjudicatory institution, may it be courts, tribunals, or commissions, to adopt technological solutions such as video-conferencing and make them available to litigants and the members of the Bar on a regular and consistent basis.
“The use of technology is no longer an option. Properly deployed for the purpose of conducting hybrid or virtual hearings, technology has the potential to ensure access to justice by obviating the need for citizens to travel long distances to secure the right of being heard. … there can be no gainsaying the fact that e-filing provides round the clock access to courts, and in the process, facilitates the convenience of lawyers and litigants”, said the Court.
The Court directed that all SICs must ensure that e-filing of complaints and appeals is provided in a streamlined manner to every litigant and steps should also be taken having regard to the provisions of Section 26 of the RTI Act to ensure that service is effected on the Public Information Officers through the electronic mode which shall also be implemented by December 31, 2023.
“All Central and State Ministries shall take steps within a period of one month from the date of this order to compile the email addresses of the Central and State Public Information Officers which shall be furnished to the CIC and to all the SICs, as the case may be. … In order to facilitate the implementation of this order, we direct that the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training shall convene a meeting of all the Central and State Information Commissioners within a period of one month from the date of this order. Comprehensive modalities for the implementation of the above directions shall be set up”, also ordered the Court.
Accordingly, the Apex Court disposed of the writ petition.
Cause Title- Kishan Chand Jain v. Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2023 INSC 915)
