The Supreme Court recalled its own order – which would have brought sweeping changes in the functioning of the RTI machinery allowed MP and MLA now as Information Commissioners.
The Supreme Court stated that as the judgment under review suffers from mistake of law we recall the directions and declarations in the judgment under review. Secondly, SC Allowed Member of Parliament or Member of the Legislature or a person holding any other office of profit or connected with any political party or carrying on any business or pursuing any profession from being considered for appointment as Chief Information Commissioner or Information Commissioner. And lastly, wherever Chief Information Commissioner is of the opinion that intricate questions of law will have to be decided in a matter coming up before the Information Commission, he will ensure that the matter is heard by an Information Commissioner who has wide knowledge and experience in the field of law.
The apex court had earlier in its judgment of September 13, 2012, reasoned that the job of the information commissioners was judicial in nature. That is why it had asked the government to involve the chief justice of the SC or the respective high court in the appointment of information commissioners. This Court held that the Information Commission is a judicial tribunal having the essential trappings of a Court and, as an irresistible corollary, it will follow that the appointments to the Information Commission are made in consultation with the judiciary. Therefore, following judgements were passed: