ON JULY 9, THE DELHI HIGH COURT, while deciding a writ petition filed by five journalists seeking access to Central Information Commission (‘CIC;) hearings both physically and virtually, without requiring prior approval or special permission, refused to direct CIC to conduct virtual hearings.
In Saurav Das & Ors v. Central Information Commission, a writ petition filed by journalists Saurav Das, Betwa Sharma, Vinita Deshmukh, Kunal Purohit, and Mohit M. Rao sought direction that the proceedings before CIC under the Right to Information (RTI) Act be open to the general public as it performs quasi-judicial functions and therefore, it is essential that its proceedings remain open to journalists and the public for scrutiny and reporting. Access to proceedings would also ensure transparency and public accountability in the working of the CIC. The petitioner approached CIC prior to the Court asking for public access to hearings. However, they claimed that the CIC did not take any action on their request.
There is no law or rule that expressly states that CIC hearings cannot be accessed without special or prior permission. The CIC’s office order dated September 23, 2016 itself states that ‘hearings before the Commission are ordinarily open to the public, subject to availability of space and prior intimation.’ However, in practice, public access is restricted, and permission is typically required.
The division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal observed that the order dated September 23, 2016 passed by the Commission already states that “ordinarily the hearings of the cases are open to public.” The bench noted that the issue is not a simple one and would require huge infrastructural investment. The court advised the petitioners to represent their cause to the CIC or explore the ongoing Supreme Court proceedings on the same issue. The Court held, “Regarding prayer for permitting entry to the general public and journalists physically, we permit the petitioners to represent their cause to the CIC, which shall take an appropriate decision expeditiously.”
Another petition, filed by advocate Kishan Chand Jain raises concerns over hybrid hearings conducted by CIC through NIC studios instead of providing direct links to online hearings. The petition urges that it causes inconvenience to appellants who are required to travel to the studios to partake in online hearings, which may often be situated at great distance from their home or workplace. On April 1, 2025, the Supreme Court issued show-cause notices to various State Information Commissions for not complying with the Court’s earlier order mandating adoption of hybrid hearing options and e-filing for RTI applicants.
Das has noted on X that while the High Court has directed them to explore the option of approaching the Supreme Court, both matters are “not identical.”