The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has emphasized the need for the Central Information Commission (CIC) to expedite the handling of Right to Information (RTI) appeals, addressing the significant backlog that has accumulated over the years. This observation was made in the context of the case Junaid Javid V/s Union of India, highlighting the absence of a statutory timeline in the Right to Information Act, 2005 for resolving second appeals and complaints.
Judicial Observations on CIC’s Functioning
A Division Bench consisting of Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Mohammad Yousuf Wani delivered the judgment while addressing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition. The petition sought a directive for the CIC to resolve all outstanding second appeals, particularly those from Jammu & Kashmir residents, within a 45-day timeframe. However, the Court noted that while the RTI Act does not specify a deadline, the CIC should not allow appeals to languish indefinitely.
“The Right to Information Act, 2005 does not stipulate a specific timeline for second appeals and complaints, and thus, we cannot mandate a 45-day resolution period. Nevertheless, the CIC cannot defer decisions indefinitely,” the Court stated in its order dated July 1. The Bench urged the CIC to establish a mechanism to manage the backlog and process new appeals efficiently, considering its infrastructural limitations.
Case Details and Court’s Recommendations
Junaid Javid, a resident of Uri-Baramulla, filed the PIL, prompting the High Court’s intervention. The CIC, in its defense, attributed the delay to infrastructural challenges and a high volume of pending appeals. The High Court acknowledged these constraints but stressed that they should not justify prolonged inaction.
While the Court refrained from imposing a strict 45-day deadline, it underscored the necessity for the CIC to enhance its processes to handle appeals more promptly. The Bench also advised the CIC to consider any viable suggestions from the petitioner for improving its operations.
Advocate Naveed Bukhtiyar represented the petitioner in the case, while Deputy Solicitor General TM Shamsi and advocate Rehana Qayoom appeared for the respondents. The High Court concluded the PIL by directing the CIC to implement measures to alleviate the backlog and ensure timely processing of appeals, taking into account the suggestions if deemed practical.
