<p>The Central Information Commission had on April 18 directed the Supreme Court’s registry to reveal complete information to RTI activist Subhash Chandra Agrawal on several aspects, including on action taken by it on placing all the papers before the Chief Justice of India in the matter.<br /><br />A Division Bench in its verdict dated on November 26 last year had directed the Supreme Court’s registry to place the matter before the CJI. <br /><br />The Bench had passed such an order while deciding on the appeal filed by SC’s registry challenging an order passed by the CIC directing it to disclose “complete correspondence exchanged between Constitutional authorities concerned with file notings relating to appointment of Justice H L Dattu, Justice A K Ganguly and Justice R M Lodha superseding seniority of Justice A P Shah, Justice A K Patnaik and Justice V K Gupta as allegedly objected to (by) Prime Minister’s Office”.<br /><br />The PMO had sent the collegium’s recommendation back to the apex court panel in 2008, saying that then Delhi HC Chief Justice Shah, then Madhya Pradesh HC Chief Justice Patnaik and then Uttarakhand HC Chief Justice Gupta were senior to justices Dattu, Lodha and Ganguly. <br /><br />But the Supreme Court collegium, then headed by K G Balakrishnan, brushed aside the objections and re-endorsed the names for appointment to the top court.</p>
<p>The Central Information Commission had on April 18 directed the Supreme Court’s registry to reveal complete information to RTI activist Subhash Chandra Agrawal on several aspects, including on action taken by it on placing all the papers before the Chief Justice of India in the matter.<br /><br />A Division Bench in its verdict dated on November 26 last year had directed the Supreme Court’s registry to place the matter before the CJI. <br /><br />The Bench had passed such an order while deciding on the appeal filed by SC’s registry challenging an order passed by the CIC directing it to disclose “complete correspondence exchanged between Constitutional authorities concerned with file notings relating to appointment of Justice H L Dattu, Justice A K Ganguly and Justice R M Lodha superseding seniority of Justice A P Shah, Justice A K Patnaik and Justice V K Gupta as allegedly objected to (by) Prime Minister’s Office”.<br /><br />The PMO had sent the collegium’s recommendation back to the apex court panel in 2008, saying that then Delhi HC Chief Justice Shah, then Madhya Pradesh HC Chief Justice Patnaik and then Uttarakhand HC Chief Justice Gupta were senior to justices Dattu, Lodha and Ganguly. <br /><br />But the Supreme Court collegium, then headed by K G Balakrishnan, brushed aside the objections and re-endorsed the names for appointment to the top court.</p>
