Supreme Court of India is *allergic* to transparency in the country

New Delhi: The suprme court today argued before the Central Information Commission (CIC) that Right to Information (RTI) cannot apply unless the sought information is"lawfully" held by an authority in a manner a title of property is held, which wasrejected by CIC.

Presenting the apex court's arguments before the Commission, advocate Devadatt Kamat said the word "held" as mentioned section 2 (j) of the RTI Act does not does not mean possession of it unless there is a sanction of law behind holding of information. Hence, there cannot be any Right to Information, he maintained.

Chief information commissioner Wajahat Habibullah said the argument was not correct and would "strike out the root of the RTI Act" as in that case no information could be asked under the transparency law.

Habibullah said the word "held" mentioned in the section means ordinarily held adding it does not say lawfully held or held like property title as mentioned by apex court.

The CIC was hearing the plea of information rights activist SC Agrawal whose application seeking complete correspondence with the CJI in the case of justice R Reghupati of Madras high court being allegedly approached by a Union minister to influence his decisions was rejected by the supreme court registry.

Section 2 (j) says "right to information" means the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority