HARI RAM DHIMAN Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner makes out a grievance that action of the authorities in insisting for payment of postal charges for furnishing information, under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), is ultra vires, unconstitutional and illegal.

(2.) The Act came to be enacted with the solitary object of setting up a practical regime of right to information so that citizens could secure access to information, which was under the control of public authorities, so that transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority could be promoted. The constitution of a Central Information Commission and State information Commissions and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto was provided for.

(3.) India is a Democratic Republic. Object of the Act postulates that a democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information, which are vital to its functioning and also to contain corruption and to hold Governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed. The Act harmonizes the conflicting interests. Optimum use of physical resources and preservation of confidentiality of sensitive information being one of them.