Uttarakhand High Court directs Centre to provide information to IFS officer under RTI

Nainital: The Uttarakhand High Court has directed the Central government to provide records related to Indian Forest Service (IFS) officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi's empanelment for the post of joint secretary at the Centre to the officer.

Chaturvedi had sought the records related to his own empanelment under the RTI Act.

A division bench of the high court comprising Chief Justice Ritu Bahri and Justice Alok Kumar Verma in its order dated September 3 said that in view of the petitioner's demand for his own records, the respondents are being directed to provide the records of the process and decision making related to the empanelment of the petitioner.

The Appointments Committee of the Cabinet had not approved the empanelment of Chaturvedi and one other IFS officer of the 2002 batch for holding the post of joint secretary or an equivalent post at the Centre in November, 2022.

It has also been clarified in the order that only the records related to the empanelment of the petitioner will be provided to the petitioner.

Chaturvedi himself pleaded and argued his case before the court.

In his plea, Chaturvedi cited his consistently excellent grading, appreciation of his performance as the chief vigilance officer (CVO) at AIIMS, Delhi, by the Union Health Ministry, four orders of the President passed in his favour during his tenure in Haryana.

The Uttarakhand High Court cited various orders of the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court in which his performance and honesty were appreciated.

Chaturvedi alleged that he was also harassed for many years by people in powerful posts who were after him because of his honesty and fearlessness in performing his official duties.

Chaturvedi had earlier filed a petition in the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) in December 2022.

The CAT had rejected his petition, saying the documents related to it are confidential and their disclosure is also prohibited under the RTI Act.

Chaturvedi, while challenging the CAT's orders in the high court, said that the orders have been passed as baseless, imaginary, factually incorrect and without evidence whereas there is a provision in the RTI Act that the decisions of the Council of Ministers, their reasons and the material on which they are based can be made public after the case is complete or over.