This commission maintains that the requested information permissible under the Act, 2017 cannot be denied on the grounds of lis alibi pendens.
This commission has maintained through its different Orders that pendency of the writ petition between the parties does not bar the provision of information under the Act unless specifically barred by the court itself, or, under the provisions of the Act. Therefore, the contention of the Respondent that “Section 16 (i) (v) of the RAI Act, 2017, inter alia, states that the information may be exempted if its disclosure is likely to prejudice the proceedings in a court or a tribunal” does not hold water.
Our ability to exercise our fundamental right of access to information enables us to attain our other fundamental rights such as gainful employment, right to life, right to clean drinking water, right to breathe in in clean air and right to healthcare services etc. In fact, the constitutional right of access to information helps citizens in the exercise of right of access to justice as well by having access to records/information to effectively present their cases in the court of law.
This commission holds that while the Respondent has provided the requested information pertaining to “the payment details in respect of officer from July 2020 to June 2021 and from July 2021 onwards”, the Respondent has not provided the requested information pertaining to the “status of house requisition, whether continuing or otherwise”.
This commission also maintains that the Appellant has expanded the scope of his original request which this commission cannot entertain on the principle that such an expansion in the original information request leads to putting this commission in a never-ending process which hampers proceedings on the other appeals. However, the Appellant has the right to file another information request to the public body.