NEW DELHI: The
chief information commissioner and
information commissioners cannot be treated at par with
Supreme Court judges as the former are
statutory appointments and the required qualifications are different from those needed to be appointed as judges of the apex court, government sources said.
Sources said granting SC judge status to members of one statutory body and denying it to the others is “unfair”. “There are 31 SC judges. In the Election Commission, only three functionaries are in positions whereas through the equivalence provided in the RTI Act, more than 30 functionaries are being assigned such status and equivalence.
This number is very large and creates anomaly with reference to other statutory bodies,” a source said.
Posts of ICs and SC judges are also incomparable, the sources said, because while the former is created through a statute, the Supreme Court judges hold constitutional positions and pass orders that become the law of the land. Election Commission is similarly empowered by the Constitution. Orders passed by information commissioners, on the other hand, can even be challenged in the high courts, sources said.
“The information commission is a creature of a statute and not the Constitution. “Its mandate is confined to protection of a statutory right viz: Right to Information,” said a source.
As per the present provisions, the chief information commissioner and information commissioners in the Centre and states are given status equivalent to the chief election commissioner and election commissioners. The CEC and ECs are equated to the Supreme Court judges in terms of conditions of service.