Supreme Court tells Centre, states to fill vacancies in information commissions

The Supreme Court has directed the Centre and state governments to initiate the process of filling up posts in Information Commissions 1-2 months before an information commissioner retires.

A double bench of Justice A K Sikri and Justice S Abdul Nazeer directed the Centre to bring more transparency in the selection process by making public criteria of shortlisting candidates for the vacant posts. The decision comes in a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by RTI activists Anjali Bhardwaj, Amrita Johri and Lokesh Batra, who had approached the apex court over the issue of vacant posts in Central Information Commission and state information commissions.

The double bench emphasised that there was a need to fill vacant posts before a vacancy arises. “We would also like to impress upon the respondents to fill up vacancies, in future, without any delay. For this purpose, it would be apposite that the process for filling up of a particular vacancy is initiated 1 to 2 months before the date on which the vacancy is likely to occur so that there is not much time lag between the occurrence of vacancy and filling up of the said vacancy,” the judgement says.


The court also called for better transparency in the selection process and emphasised that eminent citizens from fields other than bureaucracy are chosen as information commissioners. Observing that selection process is conducted by bureaucrats, “Official bias in favour of its own class is writ large in the selection process.” “The court said, “It is, however, emphasised that there can be equally suitable persons from other walks of life as well who may be the aspirants of such posts. This court, therefore, impresses upon the search committee, in future, to pick up suitable candidates from other categories as well.”

The court called for improved transparency in the process. “… it would also be appropriate for the Search Committee to make the criteria for shortlisting the candidates, public, so that it is ensured that shortlisting is done on the basis of objective and rational criteria,” the judgement says.

The apex court emphasised that timely appointments are essential for implementation of RTI Act. “We would like to place on record that aforesaid directions are given keeping in view the salient purpose which RTI Act is supposed to serve. This Act is enacted not only to sub-serve and ensure freedom of speech. On proper implementation, it has the potential to bring about good governance which is an integral part of any vibrant democracy. Attaining good governance is also one of the visions of the Constitution,” the judges observed in the 52-page judgements.