Collegium Discussion Shall Not Be In Public Domain: SC Rejects Plea Seeking Details
The apex court rejected the plea that sought to make the details of its 2018 Collegium meet public.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed the plea seeking details of the 2018 Collegium meeting saying that only the final decision needs to be uploaded on the website.
The court denied providing the details of Collegium's December 12, 2018 meeting under the Right to Information Act and asserted that the discussion cannot be disclosed to the public.
Supreme Court says there was no substance in the plea challenging Delhi High Court order and the same deserves to be dismissed.
— ANI (@ANI) December 9, 2022
SC clarified whatever is discussed in the Collegium meeting shall not be in the public domain and "only final decision required to be uploaded."
A beach of Justice MR Shah and Justice CT Ravikumar passed the judgment on the Special Leave Petition filed by RTI activist Anjali Bharadwaj. The plea challenged a Delhi High Court order that dismissed her petition for information about the 2018 Collegium meeting under the RTI Act.
ALSO READ: UP Cop Who Complained About Mess Food Goes To HC Against His Transfer
"It is to be noted that a final decision is taken by the collegium only after due consultation. During the consultation if some discussion takes place, but no final decision is taken and no resolution is drawn, it cannot be said that any final decision is taken by the collegium", Justice MR Shah said while pronouncing the order, reported Live Law.
The bench added, "Whatever is discussed shall not be in the public domain. As per the resolution dated 03.10.2017, only the final resolution and the decision is required to be uploaded in the Supreme Court website".
2018 Collegium Meeting
On December 12, 2018, the then Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, and four senior-most Judges of the Supreme Court -- Justices Madan B Lokur, AK Sikri, SA Bobde, and NV Ramana took certain decisions regarding the appointment of judges. The details of the meeting were not uploaded on the Court's website.
The decisions were later overturned.
Top Headlines
