CIC Can't Comment Upon Utilization Of Funds By MPs Under MPLADS: Delhi High Court Expunges Observations

The Delhi High Court has recently observed that the Central Information Commission (CIC) has no jurisdiction to comment upon utilization of funds by the Members of Parliament under the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS).

Justice Subramonium Prasad expunged the observations made by CIC regarding utilization of MPLADS funds and its abuse in an RTI application filed by one Ram Gopal Dixit.

“The Ld. CIC has no jurisdiction to comment upon the utilization of funds by the Members of Parliament under the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS). The scope of the RTI Act is only to ensure that information sought for under the RTI Act is dissipated in order to secure access to information under the control of public authorities,” the court said.

The court disposed of a plea moved by the Central Government through Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation challenging two orders passed by CIC in 2018.

Dixit had filed an RTI application seeking information about the work initiated, pending and completed by Rajesh Diwakar, then MP from Hathras Constituency. He also sought details of MPLADS fund utilization and status of works recommended and executed in North Eastern Railway such as Road or Railway Station.

It was Centre's case It that CIC exceeded its jurisdiction by commenting upon the action taken by the Members of Parliament in spending MPLADS funds which was beyond its jurisdiction.

It was contended that CIC ought to have confined itself only to the question raised in the RTI application or any other aspect concerning the RTI application.

Observing that CIC has no jurisdiction to comment adversely upon the functioning of any public authority, the court said:

“Therefore, the observations made by the Ld. CIC commenting upon as to how the Members of Parliament are utilizing the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS) funds have to be expunged.”

It however retained the portion whereby CIC directed the public authority under Section 19(8)(a)(iii) of RTI Act to publish MP-wise, Constituency wise and work-wise details of the funds in question.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Rahul Sharma, SPC with Mr. C.K. Bhatt, Mr. Ayush Bhatt, Advocates

Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Lalit Bhardwaj and Mr. Jatin Anand Dwivedi, Advocates

Title: UNION OF INDIA THROUGH MOSPI v. RAM GOPAL DIXIT

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 686

Click Here To Read Order