Though This Court An Ardent Supporter Of Transparency In Other Public Agencies, It is Not So As To Information Residing Within Itself: Bhushan Tells SC, Judgment Reserved

As the Supreme Court five-judge bench resumed hearing on Thursday on the court's own appeals against the judiciary being subject to the RTI regime, Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi clarified that one of the contentious issues- the disclosure of the identity of the union minister who had in 2009 attempted to influence Justice R. Regupathy of the Madras High Court for a favourable judgment- was. As the Supreme Court five-judge bench resumed hearing on Thursday on the court's own appeals against the judiciary being subject to the RTI regime, Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi clarified that one of the contentious issues- the disclosure of the identity of the union minister who had in 2009 attempted to influence Justice R. Regupathy of the Madras High Court for a favourable judgment- was no longer alive. So Advocate Prashant Bhushan, for the respondent, RTI activist Subhash Chandra Agarwal, addressed the court on why the correspondence between the highest functionaries in the Judiciary and the Executive pertaining to the supersession of relatively senior judges and the rejection of lawyers for elevation must also be placed in the public domain. He contended that though the court has been an ardent supporter of openness and transparency in other public agencies, it has not been so forthcoming as to information residing within itself- "For all other functionaries, there is one law on disclosure of even file notings as to selections, But judges inhabit a different universe!.When information was sought as to how many judgments have been reserved and for what length of time, both the CIC and the single judge of the High Court had said that this information should be disclosed.