[LIVE] Supreme Court Updates [Validity Of Finance Bill And Supreme Court Vs RTI]

We need to note that following non-exhaustive considerations needs to be considered while assessing the ‘public interest’ under Section 8 of the Acta. Nature and content of the information b. Consequences of non-disclosure; dangers and benefits to public c. Type of confidential obligation. d. Beliefs of the confidant; reasonable suspicion e. Party to whom information is disclosed f. Manner in which information acquired g. Public and private interests h.Freedom of expression and proportionality: Justice Ramana

In any case we can conclude that there are certain information which are inherently private and are presumptively protected under the privacy rights. These information include age, gender, sex, sexual preferences etc. These instances need to be kept in mind while assessing the first requirement under the aforesaid test: Justice Ramana

It must be kept in the mind that the transparency cannot be allowed to run to its absolute, considering the fact that efficiency is equally important principle to be taken into fold. We may note that right to information should not be allowed to be used as a tool of surveillance. While applying the second step the concerned authority needs to balance these considerations as well: Justice Ramana

Breaking : RTI Applicable To Office Of CJI; SC Upholds Delhi HC Judgment

I concur with Bhagwati in SP Gupta

Assets information shared by judges with CJI is not in fiduciary capacity

The right to privacy is also a constitutional right .

In any given case, information officer should weigh the public interest

Information officer must employ the principle of proportionality

The approach of Bhagwati by SP Gupta should be the standard with which disclosure on appointment process is done: Justice Chandrachud

J. Ramana - The judiciary must be protected from surveillance. RTI can be used as a tool for keeping an eye on the judiciary.

Judicial independence is the basis with which judiciary reposes trust of the citizens

RTI cannot be used as a tool of surveillance

Both rights are two faces of the same coin

What is merely required is balancing of formula

Purport of 8(1)(j) is to balance privacy and public interest

I concur with Justice Khanna's Judgment; Justice Ramana