SIC, Haryana, forms larger bench to re-look at High Court Judgment allowing details of corrupt IAS,IPS,HCS,HPS Officers

Just now received the intimation that the State Information Commission, Haryana has constituted the larger bench for taking decision in the disclosure of details of the IAS, IPS, HPS, HCS Officers. As per my understanding the larger bench is either constituted to decide the question of Law which requires deep consideration or if the small bench doubt the correctness of earlier decision. Surprisingly, in the present matter the Question of Law has already been decided by the High Court and in principle the information regarding the corruption and details of corruption cases pertaining to the public servants can not be withheld. To appreciate the issue lets have a look at the relevant portion of the Judgment of the High Court, which reads:

“In the present case as noticed from the application, no personal information as such is being sought for against any one officer. General detail of the corruption cases pending against the serving and retired public servants and as to whether in spite of registration of such corruption cases, the service benefits to such officers had been given or not and which officer had passed such orders were sought for. It is thus apparent that what is being sought is the information relating to corruption and it is not the information pertaining to a particular individual as such. The respondent Commissioner, however, in spite of noticing the fact that the appellant had raised this issue has not given any valid reason while upholding the orders of authorities below and has only given a stamp of approval to the same....In the present case as noticed the petitioner seeks the information regarding the corruption and details of corruption cases pertaining to the public servants in the State of Haryana. Keeping in view the above principles laid down by the Division Bench in First Appellate Authority-cum-Additional Director General of Police's case (supra) and fact that the judgment of the Apex Court in Girish Ramchandra Deshpande's case (supra) is not applicable in the facts and circumstance of the present case, this Court is of the opinion that order 2.4.2014 (Annexure P/6) passed the respondent-Commission requires a revisit and cannot be sustained.”

Therefore, when the Substantial Question of Law has already been decided by the High Court, I am unable to understand what remains to be decided by the Larger Bench of the Commission. I highly doubt the intent and object of constituting the larger bench only for deciding the factual matrix of the case.

            I am afraid that the particular class of bureaucrat lobby sink deep into corruption may try to undermine the very basic object of the RTI Act, i.e., ‘in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority’...  ‘democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information which are vital to its functioning and also to contain corruption and to hold Governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed’ That is why the ex-bureaucrats, who during service tenure trained to maintain secrecy and even covered-up the corruption, should not be parked in the Information Commission. During my considerable attachment with the Central Information Commission I experienced that even the honest bureaucrats; due to the long formed habit of secrecy attained during service tenure, can not be expected to do justice to the information seekers.