1

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION

Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2006/00257-58
Right to Information Act 2005 Section 19

Appellant: Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal
Respondent: Lok Sabha Secretariat / Rajya Sabha Secretariat

Facts:
On 30.2.06 and 18.2.06 respectively appellant Shri Agrawal applied to Shri
Deepak Mahna, CAPIO, Lok Sabha and Shri Deepak Goyal, CPIO, Rajya Sabha
referring to petitions dated 6.11.05 till 9.11.05 addressed to Honble Speaker and
Honble Chairperson of the above two public authorities regarding his complaint
against a Judge of the Delhi High Court. He asked for status of these petitions
under provisions of RTI as also complete details and noting on file movement, for
which he was ready to pay the appropriate fee. In his application to PIO Shri
Deepak Goyal, he also referred to the status of his letters of the same date on the
subject of judicial reforms. To his application to the CPIO Lok Sabha, the
appellant Shri Agrawal received a response on 16.2.06 in which it was indicated to
him that his petitions were found to be not actionable. He, therefore, made an
appeal to Shri S.K.Verma, Addl. Secretary, and Appellate Authority on 20.2.06
pleading that a copy of his appeal be placed before the Speaker, Lok Sabha. Shri
Deepak Goyal, CPIO Rajya Sabha on the other hand replied that, this Secretariat
has no direct role in both the matters addressed therein. As regards the removal of
a judge of the High Court, I am to inform you that the Constitution of India
prescribes a specific procedure there under in Articles 124 and 217 which
contemplate action on the part of both the Houses of Parliament as well as the
President of India. Similarly your second petition, which relates to judicial reforms,
concerns the Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs. You may, therefore,
write to that Ministry. Against this decision, the appellant Shri Subhash Chandra
Agrawal moved an appeal to Shri N.C.Joshi, Addl. Secretary, Rajya Sabha, and
Appellate Authority on 5.4.06, who found appellants request unacceptable, since
2
constitutional provisions governing removal of a Judge in the High Court and the
subject of Judicial Reforms did not give a direct role to the Rajya Sabha
Secretariat. The two cases being from the same appellant and concerning the
same matter in two Houses of the same Parliament, these have been clubbed
together for hearing.

The matter was heard on 8.9.2006. The followings are present:-
1. Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal
2. Shri P.K.Grover, CPIO Lok Sabha
3. Sh. Deepak Mahna, CAPIO, Lok Sabha
4. Sh. Harish Chander, AD(IC) Lok Sabha
5. Sh. N.C.Joshi, Addl.Secy., Rajya Sabha
6. Sh.Deepak Goyal, CPIO & Director, Rajya Sabha

The appellant presented his counter/reply to the comments received from
both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha Secretariats in response to the appeal notice
issued by this commission. This emphasizes the grievance redress sought
through the applications rather than any information denied. Appellant Shri
Agrawal has also argued in this counter reply that in many decisions, the
Commission has not differentiated information from action to be taken, and should
do so now.

DECI SI ON NOTI CE
It is clear from the response received by the appellant that the information
sought on his specific question as to what action has been taken on his earlier
petitions by the Honble authorities, has indeed been provided. Insofar as
decisions of this Commission are concerned, these call for action only in relation to
supply of information, not for grievance redress of an administrative nature. That
is beyond purview of this Commission. I, therefore, find that both the petitions are
without substance and these are dismissed. However, appellant has prayed that
his petition presented in this hearing may be forwarded to appropriate authority in
3
Government. Petition may, therefore, be forwarded to the Office of the Union
Minister, Law & Justice for the attention of the Minister.

Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.



(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner
8.9.2006


Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of
this Commission.



(L.C.Singhi)
Addl. Registrar
8.9.2006