![]() ![]() To establish this claim, the petitioners sought the disclosure of correspondence between the Law Minister, the Chief Justice of Delhi, and the Chief Justice of India. One of the issues raised was regarding the validity of Central Government orders on the non-appointment of two judges. The foregoing case dealt with a number of petitions involving important constitutional questions regarding the appointment and transfer of judges and the independence of judiciary. The Court reasoned that a particular document regarding the affairs of the state is only immune from disclosure when disclosure is clearly contrary to public interest and in this case the appointment and transfer of judges is of immense public interest. The petitioners sought the disclosure of correspondence between the Law Minister, the Chief Justice of Delhi, and the Chief Justice of India on the appointment and transfer of judges. The Indian Supreme Court rejected the central government’s claim for protection against disclosure and directed the Union of India to disclose the requested documents. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |