TR Andhyarujina has a typically insightful op-ed addressing this issue in today’s Hindu. (For posts from the archives of this blog which reference his previously published views, click here). He notes that most commentators have missed the true significance of Justice Bhat’s judgment.
What is notable about the piece is Andhyarujina’s willingness to gently chide the CJI (and those who advised him to resist Subhash Agarwal’s initial RTI request), when he observes that “[t]he entire public controversy could have been avoided by the Supreme Court by providing this innocuous piece of information.”
Towards the end of the piece, Andhyarujina examines the implications that Justice Bhat’s judgment could have on the appointments process for superior court judges, and identifies “troublesome problems.” Analyses such as this will, hopefully, lead to a closer scrutiny of Justice Bhat’s judgment and its wider implications.
The implications of the Judgment of the Delhi High Court are indeed far-reaching and the editorial succinctly throws light on the same. In all probability the judgment would be challenged in the DB of the Delhi High Court, yet the public outcry for such accountability needs to be placed in context with the impairment that such disclosure via the RTI Act would attract. Probably, a specific legislation in such matter would be more appropriate. However, in light of the voluntary disclosure adopted by the Supreme Court, it would be very interesting to follow how the case proceeds.
Ashish Virmani
Student, NLU Jodhpur