Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]Code Contextif (Configure::read('debug')) {
trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);
} else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6805105a1333c-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6805105a1333c-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6805105a1333c-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25998, 'title' => 'Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -PTI </div> <p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate. </p> <p align="justify"> A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information,&quot; the bench said. </p> <p align="justify"> However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information &quot;shall not&quot; be required to give any reason for requesting the information. </p> <p align="justify"> The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities,&quot; it said. </p> <p align="justify"> Terming the order &quot;illegal&quot;, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against &quot;letter and spirit&quot; of the Act. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court,&quot; he told PTI. </p> <p align="justify"> RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so. </p> <p align="justify"> Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right,&quot; he said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied. </p> <p align="justify"> Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is &quot;complete violation of the RTI Act&quot;. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21,&quot; Mr. Nayak said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said it is a &quot;big surprise&quot; and &quot;travesty of existing jurisprudence&quot; if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 September, 2014, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article6431643.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 4674036, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 25998, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC', 'metaKeywords' => 'Right to Information,Right to Information (RTI),Right to Information Act,transparency,Accountability,rti,RTI Act', 'metaDesc' => ' -PTI In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against...', 'disp' => '<div align="justify">-PTI</div><p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate.</p><p align="justify">A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists.</p><p align="justify">&quot;If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information,&quot; the bench said.</p><p align="justify">However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information &quot;shall not&quot; be required to give any reason for requesting the information.</p><p align="justify">The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act.</p><p align="justify">&quot;We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities,&quot; it said.</p><p align="justify">Terming the order &quot;illegal&quot;, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against &quot;letter and spirit&quot; of the Act.</p><p align="justify">&quot;It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court,&quot; he told PTI.</p><p align="justify">RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so.</p><p align="justify">Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason.</p><p align="justify">He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition.</p><p align="justify">&quot;There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right,&quot; he said.</p><p align="justify">He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied.</p><p align="justify">Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is &quot;complete violation of the RTI Act&quot;.</p><p align="justify">&quot;The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21,&quot; Mr. Nayak said.</p><p align="justify">He said it is a &quot;big surprise&quot; and &quot;travesty of existing jurisprudence&quot; if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25998, 'title' => 'Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -PTI </div> <p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate. </p> <p align="justify"> A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information,&quot; the bench said. </p> <p align="justify"> However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information &quot;shall not&quot; be required to give any reason for requesting the information. </p> <p align="justify"> The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities,&quot; it said. </p> <p align="justify"> Terming the order &quot;illegal&quot;, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against &quot;letter and spirit&quot; of the Act. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court,&quot; he told PTI. </p> <p align="justify"> RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so. </p> <p align="justify"> Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right,&quot; he said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied. </p> <p align="justify"> Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is &quot;complete violation of the RTI Act&quot;. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21,&quot; Mr. Nayak said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said it is a &quot;big surprise&quot; and &quot;travesty of existing jurisprudence&quot; if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 September, 2014, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article6431643.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 4674036, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 4 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 5 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 6 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 25998 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC' $metaKeywords = 'Right to Information,Right to Information (RTI),Right to Information Act,transparency,Accountability,rti,RTI Act' $metaDesc = ' -PTI In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against...' $disp = '<div align="justify">-PTI</div><p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate.</p><p align="justify">A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists.</p><p align="justify">&quot;If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information,&quot; the bench said.</p><p align="justify">However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information &quot;shall not&quot; be required to give any reason for requesting the information.</p><p align="justify">The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act.</p><p align="justify">&quot;We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities,&quot; it said.</p><p align="justify">Terming the order &quot;illegal&quot;, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against &quot;letter and spirit&quot; of the Act.</p><p align="justify">&quot;It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court,&quot; he told PTI.</p><p align="justify">RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so.</p><p align="justify">Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason.</p><p align="justify">He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition.</p><p align="justify">&quot;There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right,&quot; he said.</p><p align="justify">He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied.</p><p align="justify">Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is &quot;complete violation of the RTI Act&quot;.</p><p align="justify">&quot;The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21,&quot; Mr. Nayak said.</p><p align="justify">He said it is a &quot;big surprise&quot; and &quot;travesty of existing jurisprudence&quot; if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -PTI In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div align="justify">-PTI</div><p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate.</p><p align="justify">A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists.</p><p align="justify">"If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information," the bench said.</p><p align="justify">However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information "shall not" be required to give any reason for requesting the information.</p><p align="justify">The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act.</p><p align="justify">"We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities," it said.</p><p align="justify">Terming the order "illegal", senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against "letter and spirit" of the Act.</p><p align="justify">"It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court," he told PTI.</p><p align="justify">RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so.</p><p align="justify">Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason.</p><p align="justify">He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition.</p><p align="justify">"There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right," he said.</p><p align="justify">He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied.</p><p align="justify">Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is "complete violation of the RTI Act".</p><p align="justify">"The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21," Mr. Nayak said.</p><p align="justify">He said it is a "big surprise" and "travesty of existing jurisprudence" if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $maxBufferLength = (int) 8192 $file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php' $line = (int) 853 $message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]Code Context$response->getStatusCode(),
($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')
));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6805105a1333c-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6805105a1333c-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6805105a1333c-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25998, 'title' => 'Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -PTI </div> <p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate. </p> <p align="justify"> A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information,&quot; the bench said. </p> <p align="justify"> However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information &quot;shall not&quot; be required to give any reason for requesting the information. </p> <p align="justify"> The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities,&quot; it said. </p> <p align="justify"> Terming the order &quot;illegal&quot;, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against &quot;letter and spirit&quot; of the Act. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court,&quot; he told PTI. </p> <p align="justify"> RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so. </p> <p align="justify"> Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right,&quot; he said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied. </p> <p align="justify"> Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is &quot;complete violation of the RTI Act&quot;. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21,&quot; Mr. Nayak said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said it is a &quot;big surprise&quot; and &quot;travesty of existing jurisprudence&quot; if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 September, 2014, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article6431643.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 4674036, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 25998, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC', 'metaKeywords' => 'Right to Information,Right to Information (RTI),Right to Information Act,transparency,Accountability,rti,RTI Act', 'metaDesc' => ' -PTI In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against...', 'disp' => '<div align="justify">-PTI</div><p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate.</p><p align="justify">A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists.</p><p align="justify">&quot;If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information,&quot; the bench said.</p><p align="justify">However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information &quot;shall not&quot; be required to give any reason for requesting the information.</p><p align="justify">The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act.</p><p align="justify">&quot;We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities,&quot; it said.</p><p align="justify">Terming the order &quot;illegal&quot;, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against &quot;letter and spirit&quot; of the Act.</p><p align="justify">&quot;It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court,&quot; he told PTI.</p><p align="justify">RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so.</p><p align="justify">Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason.</p><p align="justify">He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition.</p><p align="justify">&quot;There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right,&quot; he said.</p><p align="justify">He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied.</p><p align="justify">Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is &quot;complete violation of the RTI Act&quot;.</p><p align="justify">&quot;The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21,&quot; Mr. Nayak said.</p><p align="justify">He said it is a &quot;big surprise&quot; and &quot;travesty of existing jurisprudence&quot; if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25998, 'title' => 'Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -PTI </div> <p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate. </p> <p align="justify"> A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information,&quot; the bench said. </p> <p align="justify"> However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information &quot;shall not&quot; be required to give any reason for requesting the information. </p> <p align="justify"> The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities,&quot; it said. </p> <p align="justify"> Terming the order &quot;illegal&quot;, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against &quot;letter and spirit&quot; of the Act. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court,&quot; he told PTI. </p> <p align="justify"> RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so. </p> <p align="justify"> Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right,&quot; he said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied. </p> <p align="justify"> Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is &quot;complete violation of the RTI Act&quot;. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21,&quot; Mr. Nayak said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said it is a &quot;big surprise&quot; and &quot;travesty of existing jurisprudence&quot; if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 September, 2014, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article6431643.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 4674036, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 4 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 5 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 6 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 25998 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC' $metaKeywords = 'Right to Information,Right to Information (RTI),Right to Information Act,transparency,Accountability,rti,RTI Act' $metaDesc = ' -PTI In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against...' $disp = '<div align="justify">-PTI</div><p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate.</p><p align="justify">A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists.</p><p align="justify">&quot;If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information,&quot; the bench said.</p><p align="justify">However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information &quot;shall not&quot; be required to give any reason for requesting the information.</p><p align="justify">The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act.</p><p align="justify">&quot;We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities,&quot; it said.</p><p align="justify">Terming the order &quot;illegal&quot;, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against &quot;letter and spirit&quot; of the Act.</p><p align="justify">&quot;It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court,&quot; he told PTI.</p><p align="justify">RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so.</p><p align="justify">Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason.</p><p align="justify">He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition.</p><p align="justify">&quot;There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right,&quot; he said.</p><p align="justify">He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied.</p><p align="justify">Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is &quot;complete violation of the RTI Act&quot;.</p><p align="justify">&quot;The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21,&quot; Mr. Nayak said.</p><p align="justify">He said it is a &quot;big surprise&quot; and &quot;travesty of existing jurisprudence&quot; if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -PTI In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div align="justify">-PTI</div><p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate.</p><p align="justify">A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists.</p><p align="justify">"If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information," the bench said.</p><p align="justify">However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information "shall not" be required to give any reason for requesting the information.</p><p align="justify">The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act.</p><p align="justify">"We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities," it said.</p><p align="justify">Terming the order "illegal", senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against "letter and spirit" of the Act.</p><p align="justify">"It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court," he told PTI.</p><p align="justify">RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so.</p><p align="justify">Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason.</p><p align="justify">He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition.</p><p align="justify">"There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right," he said.</p><p align="justify">He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied.</p><p align="justify">Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is "complete violation of the RTI Act".</p><p align="justify">"The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21," Mr. Nayak said.</p><p align="justify">He said it is a "big surprise" and "travesty of existing jurisprudence" if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $reasonPhrase = 'OK'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]Notice (8): Undefined variable: urlPrefix [APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8]Code Context$value
), $first);
$first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6805105a1333c-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6805105a1333c-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6805105a1333c-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6805105a1333c-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25998, 'title' => 'Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -PTI </div> <p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate. </p> <p align="justify"> A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information,&quot; the bench said. </p> <p align="justify"> However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information &quot;shall not&quot; be required to give any reason for requesting the information. </p> <p align="justify"> The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities,&quot; it said. </p> <p align="justify"> Terming the order &quot;illegal&quot;, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against &quot;letter and spirit&quot; of the Act. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court,&quot; he told PTI. </p> <p align="justify"> RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so. </p> <p align="justify"> Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right,&quot; he said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied. </p> <p align="justify"> Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is &quot;complete violation of the RTI Act&quot;. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21,&quot; Mr. Nayak said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said it is a &quot;big surprise&quot; and &quot;travesty of existing jurisprudence&quot; if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 September, 2014, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article6431643.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 4674036, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 25998, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC', 'metaKeywords' => 'Right to Information,Right to Information (RTI),Right to Information Act,transparency,Accountability,rti,RTI Act', 'metaDesc' => ' -PTI In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against...', 'disp' => '<div align="justify">-PTI</div><p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate.</p><p align="justify">A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists.</p><p align="justify">&quot;If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information,&quot; the bench said.</p><p align="justify">However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information &quot;shall not&quot; be required to give any reason for requesting the information.</p><p align="justify">The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act.</p><p align="justify">&quot;We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities,&quot; it said.</p><p align="justify">Terming the order &quot;illegal&quot;, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against &quot;letter and spirit&quot; of the Act.</p><p align="justify">&quot;It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court,&quot; he told PTI.</p><p align="justify">RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so.</p><p align="justify">Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason.</p><p align="justify">He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition.</p><p align="justify">&quot;There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right,&quot; he said.</p><p align="justify">He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied.</p><p align="justify">Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is &quot;complete violation of the RTI Act&quot;.</p><p align="justify">&quot;The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21,&quot; Mr. Nayak said.</p><p align="justify">He said it is a &quot;big surprise&quot; and &quot;travesty of existing jurisprudence&quot; if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25998, 'title' => 'Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -PTI </div> <p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate. </p> <p align="justify"> A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information,&quot; the bench said. </p> <p align="justify"> However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information &quot;shall not&quot; be required to give any reason for requesting the information. </p> <p align="justify"> The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities,&quot; it said. </p> <p align="justify"> Terming the order &quot;illegal&quot;, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against &quot;letter and spirit&quot; of the Act. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court,&quot; he told PTI. </p> <p align="justify"> RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so. </p> <p align="justify"> Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right,&quot; he said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied. </p> <p align="justify"> Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is &quot;complete violation of the RTI Act&quot;. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21,&quot; Mr. Nayak said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said it is a &quot;big surprise&quot; and &quot;travesty of existing jurisprudence&quot; if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 September, 2014, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article6431643.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 4674036, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 4 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 5 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 6 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 25998 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC' $metaKeywords = 'Right to Information,Right to Information (RTI),Right to Information Act,transparency,Accountability,rti,RTI Act' $metaDesc = ' -PTI In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against...' $disp = '<div align="justify">-PTI</div><p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate.</p><p align="justify">A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists.</p><p align="justify">&quot;If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information,&quot; the bench said.</p><p align="justify">However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information &quot;shall not&quot; be required to give any reason for requesting the information.</p><p align="justify">The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act.</p><p align="justify">&quot;We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities,&quot; it said.</p><p align="justify">Terming the order &quot;illegal&quot;, senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against &quot;letter and spirit&quot; of the Act.</p><p align="justify">&quot;It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court,&quot; he told PTI.</p><p align="justify">RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so.</p><p align="justify">Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason.</p><p align="justify">He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition.</p><p align="justify">&quot;There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right,&quot; he said.</p><p align="justify">He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied.</p><p align="justify">Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is &quot;complete violation of the RTI Act&quot;.</p><p align="justify">&quot;The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21,&quot; Mr. Nayak said.</p><p align="justify">He said it is a &quot;big surprise&quot; and &quot;travesty of existing jurisprudence&quot; if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -PTI In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div align="justify">-PTI</div><p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate.</p><p align="justify">A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists.</p><p align="justify">"If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information," the bench said.</p><p align="justify">However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information "shall not" be required to give any reason for requesting the information.</p><p align="justify">The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act.</p><p align="justify">"We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities," it said.</p><p align="justify">Terming the order "illegal", senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against "letter and spirit" of the Act.</p><p align="justify">"It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court," he told PTI.</p><p align="justify">RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so.</p><p align="justify">Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason.</p><p align="justify">He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition.</p><p align="justify">"There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right," he said.</p><p align="justify">He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied.</p><p align="justify">Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is "complete violation of the RTI Act".</p><p align="justify">"The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21," Mr. Nayak said.</p><p align="justify">He said it is a "big surprise" and "travesty of existing jurisprudence" if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $cookies = [] $values = [ (int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8' ] $name = 'Content-Type' $first = true $value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
<head>
<link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25998, 'title' => 'Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -PTI </div> <p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate. </p> <p align="justify"> A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists. </p> <p align="justify"> "If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information," the bench said. </p> <p align="justify"> However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information "shall not" be required to give any reason for requesting the information. </p> <p align="justify"> The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act. </p> <p align="justify"> "We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities," it said. </p> <p align="justify"> Terming the order "illegal", senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against "letter and spirit" of the Act. </p> <p align="justify"> "It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court," he told PTI. </p> <p align="justify"> RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so. </p> <p align="justify"> Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition. </p> <p align="justify"> "There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right," he said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied. </p> <p align="justify"> Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is "complete violation of the RTI Act". </p> <p align="justify"> "The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21," Mr. Nayak said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said it is a "big surprise" and "travesty of existing jurisprudence" if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 September, 2014, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article6431643.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 4674036, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 25998, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC', 'metaKeywords' => 'Right to Information,Right to Information (RTI),Right to Information Act,transparency,Accountability,rti,RTI Act', 'metaDesc' => ' -PTI In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against...', 'disp' => '<div align="justify">-PTI</div><p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate.</p><p align="justify">A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists.</p><p align="justify">"If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information," the bench said.</p><p align="justify">However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information "shall not" be required to give any reason for requesting the information.</p><p align="justify">The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act.</p><p align="justify">"We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities," it said.</p><p align="justify">Terming the order "illegal", senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against "letter and spirit" of the Act.</p><p align="justify">"It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court," he told PTI.</p><p align="justify">RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so.</p><p align="justify">Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason.</p><p align="justify">He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition.</p><p align="justify">"There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right," he said.</p><p align="justify">He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied.</p><p align="justify">Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is "complete violation of the RTI Act".</p><p align="justify">"The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21," Mr. Nayak said.</p><p align="justify">He said it is a "big surprise" and "travesty of existing jurisprudence" if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25998, 'title' => 'Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -PTI </div> <p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate. </p> <p align="justify"> A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists. </p> <p align="justify"> "If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information," the bench said. </p> <p align="justify"> However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information "shall not" be required to give any reason for requesting the information. </p> <p align="justify"> The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act. </p> <p align="justify"> "We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities," it said. </p> <p align="justify"> Terming the order "illegal", senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against "letter and spirit" of the Act. </p> <p align="justify"> "It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court," he told PTI. </p> <p align="justify"> RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so. </p> <p align="justify"> Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition. </p> <p align="justify"> "There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right," he said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied. </p> <p align="justify"> Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is "complete violation of the RTI Act". </p> <p align="justify"> "The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21," Mr. Nayak said. </p> <p align="justify"> He said it is a "big surprise" and "travesty of existing jurisprudence" if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 September, 2014, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article6431643.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'give-reasons-for-seeking-information-under-rti-madras-hc-4674036', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 4674036, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 4 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 5 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 6 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 25998 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC' $metaKeywords = 'Right to Information,Right to Information (RTI),Right to Information Act,transparency,Accountability,rti,RTI Act' $metaDesc = ' -PTI In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against...' $disp = '<div align="justify">-PTI</div><p align="justify"> In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate.</p><p align="justify">A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists.</p><p align="justify">"If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information," the bench said.</p><p align="justify">However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information "shall not" be required to give any reason for requesting the information.</p><p align="justify">The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act.</p><p align="justify">"We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities," it said.</p><p align="justify">Terming the order "illegal", senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against "letter and spirit" of the Act.</p><p align="justify">"It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court," he told PTI.</p><p align="justify">RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so.</p><p align="justify">Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason.</p><p align="justify">He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition.</p><p align="justify">"There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right," he said.</p><p align="justify">He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied.</p><p align="justify">Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is "complete violation of the RTI Act".</p><p align="justify">"The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21," Mr. Nayak said.</p><p align="justify">He said it is a "big surprise" and "travesty of existing jurisprudence" if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. </p>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'
include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
![]() |
Give reasons for seeking information under RTI: Madras HC |
-PTI In a serious blow to transparency regime in the country, the Madras High Court has said RTI applicants must give reasons for seeking information as it gave relief to its Registry from disclosing file notings on a complaint against a chief metropolitan magistrate. A division bench comprising justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and K. Ravichandrababu said an applicant must disclose the object for which information is sought and also satisfy that such object has a legal backing, a decision which may have far reaching implications on getting information under the RTI Act and which was decried by legal experts and activists. "If informations (sic) are to be furnished to a person, who does not have any reason or object behind seeking such informations, in our considered view, the intention of the Legislature is not to the effect that such informations are to be given like pamphlets to any person unmindful of the object behind seeking such information," the bench said. However, the Legislature while passing the RTI Act has specially incorporated Section 6(2) which says an applicant making request for information "shall not" be required to give any reason for requesting the information. The Madras High Court order does not mention Section 6(2) of the Right to Information Act. "We should not be mistaken as if we are saying something against the intention of the Legislature. What we want to emphasise is that a Legislation, more particularly, the one on hand, must achieve the object, viz, concrete and effective functioning of the public authority with transparency and accountability by providing the information which are under the control of such public authorities," it said. Terming the order "illegal", senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan said it is against "letter and spirit" of the Act. "It's a self-serving order by the High Court in line with a number of earlier orders of High Courts and Supreme Court virtually preventing administrative transparency of the court," he told PTI. RTI activist C.J. Karira said the judgement strikes a body blow to the RTI Act since its tantamount to striking down of Sec 6(2) without explicitly stating so. Noted RTI expert Shekhar Singh also said that the Supreme Court has defined the Right to Information as a fundamental right and to exercise it one need not give any reason. He said by definition, fundamental right means something which is a right that you have irrespective of any condition. "There are two problems with the order. It is in violation of the law. RTI specifically asks no reasons need be given for seeking information. Secondly, it is also in violation of earlier rulings of the Supreme Court saying it is fundamental right," he said. He said by this order the High Court has overturned earlier apex court rulings because the moment they said one has to give reasons for seeking information his or her fundamental right is being denied. Similar views were expressed by Venkatesh Nayak, Programme Coordinator, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative who said the order is "complete violation of the RTI Act". "The Right to Information is a fundamental right and it is available to every citizen who is born in India. You are not supposed to give reasons for exercising those fundamental rights. The Right to Information is recognised by the Supreme Court as being part of Right to free speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) and also a part of Right to Life under Article 21," Mr. Nayak said. He said it is a "big surprise" and "travesty of existing jurisprudence" if anybody says that a citizen must prove why he or she wants a particular information which ordinarily a public authority would have made public on its own. |