Right to Information — Decision of Tribunal by nature is in public domain and ought to be ordinarily accessible to any applicant — Right to Information Act, 2005, S. 6 and S. 7.

[R. K. Jain v. Appellate Tribunal For Foreign Exchange,
2010 (252) ELT 366 (CIC)]

The applicant sought information from the Asst. Registrar of
the Appellate Tribunal For Foreign Exchange, namely :

“please provide inspection of all orders passed by ATFE
during the year 2008 and from 1-6-2009 to 15-8-2009.”

“Please provide list of cases in which orders are reserved
but not yet pronounced till 10-8-2009.”

The CPIO and the Appellate Authority declined to disclose the
information to the applicant on the ground that the applicant had not mentioned
the public interest for inspecting the records.

On further appeal the Central Information  Commission
held that it is inconceivable why an  applicant should be required to state
the public interest for receiving information which was so obvious as the orders
of a legally constituted authority. Such decisions are by their very nature in
the public domain and ought to be ordinarily accessible to any applicant.

The information relates to an essential function for which
this public authority was constituted, and there can be no reason why an
information about hearings of cases, their dates, reserving orders for
pronouncement, and pronouncement of the orders after these were reserved —
should be declined to a citizen. It was, in fact, expected of the public
authority that such essential information about its functioning should be
centrally tabulated and kept available for anyone seeking inspection.

It was held that the CPIO and the Appellate Authority had
been grossly errant in discharging their responsibilities under the RTI Act.

It was directed that the information be disclosed to the appellant through
inspection of the documents mentioned in the appellant’s RTI application.