MUNISH KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has approached this Court, praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the selection and appointment of respondent Nos. 3 to 5 as the State Information Commissioners. It is the grievance of the petitioner that selection and appointment of respondent Nos. 3 to 5 is in violation of the statutory provisions as pick and choose policy has been adopted by the Statutory Committee appointed under Section 15(3) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short, "the RTI Act"). The contention is that the Selection Committee is required to appoint the State Information Commissioners through consensus and, therefore, the recommendation of the leader of opposition, who is one of the Member of the Selection Committee, is mandatory, whereas consent of the said member has not been obtained. He contends that as the leader of opposition did not attend the meeting of the Selection Committee constituted under Section 15(3) of the RTI Act and, thus, the recommendations of the said Committee, which have been accepted by the Governor of Haryana, cannot be said to be in accordance with law and, thus, the selection and appointment of respondent Nos. 3 to 5 deserves to be set -aside. It has further been stated that the petitioner is better qualified and is an eligible candidate as he fulfills all the requisite qualifications mentioned in Section 15 of the RTI Act and, therefore, the respondents were bound to appoint him over and above the selected respondent Nos. 3 to 5.

(2.) PETITIONER , who appears in person and is a Law Graduate, has made submissions on the above lines and prayed for setting -aside of selection of respondent Nos. 3 to 5 and to issue a direction to the official respondents to appoint him as a State Information Commissioner.

(3.) SECTION 15 of the RTI Act, on which the petitioner has based his claim, reads as under: -