SOMANATHAN PILLAI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who were appointed as State Information Commissioners of the Kerala State Information Commission, are aggrieved by the denial of the medical reimbursement benefits on par with such benefits as available to the Chief Secretary of the State.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioners is that while Sec. 16(5) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 ('the RTI Act', for short) provides that the salaries and allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of service of the State Information Commissioner shall be the same as that of the Chief Secretary to the State Government, the petitioners have been denied the benefit of the All India Services (Medical Facilities) Scheme, 2020, applicable to the Chief Secretaries on the ground that a Chief Secretary becomes eligible for the All India Services (Medical Facilities) Scheme, 2020, only by reason of him being a member of the All India Service. The argument of the respondents is that since the Commissioners under the RTI Act are not members of the All India Services, the All India Services (Medical Facilities) Scheme, 2020 will not ipso facto apply to the petitioners.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioners pointed out that the statutory provisions are clear. Under Sec. 16(5) of the RTI Act, it is mandated that the salaries, allowances and other conditions of service of the State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioners shall not be varied to their disadvantage after their appointments. Sec. 16 also mandates that the State Chief Information Commissioner and the State Information Commissioners appointed before the commencement of the Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2019 shall continue to be governed by the provisions of this Act and the Rules made thereunder as if the Right to Information (Amendment) Act, 2019, had not come into force.