Скачать или смотреть Chief information commissioner (CIC) appointment Case - Supreme Court Live Proceedings |

The Supreme Court is currently hearing a batch of petitions highlighting the delay and vacancies in the appointment of the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) and other Information Commissioners under the RTI Act, 2005. Petitioners argue that the Union Government has been “systematically weakening” the RTI regime by keeping key posts vacant, which has resulted in a massive backlog of second appeals and complaints. The Court has repeatedly reminded the government that the right to information is a fundamental democratic right, and that an under-staffed Commission effectively cripples transparency and accountability.

During the latest live proceedings, the Central Government informed the bench that the search and selection process for the new CIC has been completed, and that final names have been placed before the statutory selection committee. The Supreme Court noted this update and stated that, at present, it has no reason to doubt the Centre’s assurance that the appointments would be made in compliance with earlier court-mandated guidelines on transparency. The bench, however, underlined that prolonged vacancies cannot be justified and that the government must fill all posts “expeditiously and without delay.”

The Court has also observed that several State Information Commissions are functioning with similar shortages, and this undermines the entire country’s RTI framework. It has therefore continued monitoring not just the CIC appointment but the overall compliance by both the Union and the States. Further orders will focus on whether the Centre has honoured its assurances and whether the appointment of the CIC and remaining Commissioners has been completed within the timeline indicated to the Court.

-------------------------------------------------------------Fair Use Policy------------------------------------------------------------------

This content is shared strictly for purposes of news reporting, commentary, criticism, scholarship, and research, in accordance with Section 107 of the Copyright Act, 1976. Fair use is a statutory exception that permits limited use of copyrighted material for non-profit, educational, or personal purposes.

Court proceedings shown or described here are shared in line with the Supreme Court’s decisions in Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India (2018) and ANI Media Private Limited vs. Wikimedia Foundation(2025), which recognise the value of transparency, open courts, and public access to judicial hearings.