1 / 10

B&B Associates LLP

Get in touch with the best lawyer in Chandigarh for your legal matter. B&B Associates LLP provides you the best lawyer in Chandigarh who will understand your matter in the most compassionate and empathetic manner. The best lawyers of B&B Associates LLP understand the legalities involved in the most accurate manner and provide the best legal advice and services in relation to all legal sectors in Chandigarh such as criminal Lawyer, Corporate Lawyer, Commercial Law, Company Law, Business &Banking Law, Cyber Law, Matrimonial Law, divorce law etc. B&B associates LLP and its best lawyers in Chandigarh have an unmatched qualification and excellent communication, drafting and oratory skills .<br>https://bnblegal.com/ <br><br>

LawyersChandigarh
Download Presentation

B&B Associates LLP

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Limitations to Right to Information: Indian Perspective

  2. Overview On 12 December 2005, the Central Government of India approved the Right to Information Act. It gives a right to common man that they fire direct questions to the government and they need to provide a reply within 30 days. Right to information also has certain limitations and there will always be an area of information that should remain protected in public and national interest. unrestricted right can have an adverse effect of an overload of demand on administration. So the information has to be proper, clearly classified by an appropriate authority.

  3. Right to Information under the RTI Act, 2005 Is Not An Absolute Right: Section 8 of the Right to Information Act The usual exemption permitting Government to withhold access to information is generally in respect of these matters; • International relations, • National security, • Law enforcement and prevention of crime, • Internal discussions of the government, • Information forbade to be published by a court or tribunal, or if such disclosure of information leads to contempt of court. • Information which would infringe the privacy of individuals, if disclosed. • Information, particularly of a financial nature when disclosed would bestow an unfair advantage on some person or object or government, • Information arising out of a fiduciary relationship, • Information about scientific discoveries and invention and improvements, primarily in the field of weapon.

  4. Right to Information Is Not An Absolute Right • Sec. 9 of the RTI Act states that “any information, whose copyright is not held by the state, cannot be provided by it under any circumstances”. • Section 24 of the RTI Act: intelligence and security organizations established by the Central and State Governments cannot fall under the purview of this Act. • Section 24: “the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this subsection.”

  5. Case Laws India v Rahul Rasgotra The test of prejudice shall be applied by the Court to assess what the non-disclosure of government files and private notes made by public or government authorities is likely to cause to the public interest by examining the relevant files or notes in camera.

  6. GirishRamchandraDeshpande v. Central Information Commission & Ors. (Supreme Court, 2012) • The Apex Court had held that “the details disclosed by a person in his income tax returns are “personal information” which stand exempted from disclosure under clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act. • When a larger public interest is involved, then the disclosure of such information is allowed.

  7. Chandra Aggarwal v. Registrar General, Supreme Court of India • The Apex Court held that “informations about doctor’s visit expenses of judges and their families couldn’t be revealed.” • The supreme court stated that the medical expenses of judges do not come under the ambit of Right to information.

  8. Union Public Service Commission Etc. v. Angesh Kumar & Ors. (Supreme Court, 2018) • The High Court was approached for a direction to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) to disclose the details of marks (raw and scaled) awarded to them in the Civil Services (Prelims) Examination 2010. • It was decided that publishing or disclosingraw marks will cause problems which would not be in public interest. • However, if a case is made out where the Court finds that public interest requires the furnishing of information, the Court is certainly entitled to so require in a given fact situation.

  9. Conclusion • one is aware of the fact that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. • Section 8 of the RTI Act acts as a restrictive tool to keep a check on this right while maintaining the objective of the Act. • In the absence of any such reasonable restrictions, the confidential data which needs to be protected for the welfare of the State would have become a public domain, ultimately hitting in the foundation of the proper functioning of the state. • The latest judicial actions on the RTI has given a new dimension to the said right and demarcated the spheres which are outside the ambit the RTI Act.

  10. www.bnblegal.com info@bnblegal.com 7710777770 FOR QUERIES :

More Related