Plea in HC for bringing Attorney General's office under RTI

NEW DELHI: A petition for bringing the office of the Attorney General under RTI ambit has been filed in the Delhi High Court contending that any attempt to kept it out would defeat the fundamental right of citizens to get information about a public authority.

The petition has assailed the decision of the Central Information Commission (CIC) accepting the pleas of AGs' office and declaring it as not a public authority covered by RTI.

The case had come up for hearing before Justice Rajiv Shakdher who had recused himself though no reason was given for the withdrawal. Now the petition is listed for hearing before another bench on February 26.

The petition filed by RTI activist Subhash Chandra Aggarwal submitted that on the question whether the office of the Attorney General is a 'public authority' under the RTI Act, the law is absolutely crystal clear and does not leave any room for different interpretations.

"The interpretation as given by the CIC would defeat the citizens fundamental right to information to hold the State and all its instrumentalities to account," the petition filed through advocate Prashant Bhushan said.

The activist said even authorities established under any law or under any notification are covered by the definition of public authority.

"As far as law officers of the Government are concerned, their office being established under appropriate notification, are all public authorities under the RTI Act," the petition said.
The petition contended that as far as Attorney General at the Centre and Advocate Generals at the state level are concerned, they are public authorities by virtue of being a "authority or body or institution of self-government established or constituted by or under the Constitution" as required by the Sec 2(h) of RTI Act.

The petition said, "If the office of Attorney General is not established under the Constitution, then no office or post can be said to be established under the Constitution within the meaning of Sec 2(h) of the RTI Act, defeating the entire object of the Act itself that effectuates the fundamental right to know of the citizens of this country.

"Attorney General can and does attend Cabinet Meetings and be present in Parliament," the petition said adding that in several states Advocate Generals are already declared as public-authority.

"If Advocate Generals in states are public-authority as defined under RTI Act, there is no reason that Attorney General may not be a public-authority likewise," it said.

The high constitutional office of the Attorney General cannot be allowed to use technical arguments to defeat the fundamental right of the citizens, the petition said.