Court upholds disclosure order on DVAC manual, stressing transparency and accountability.

The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Tamil Nadu Information Commission's order to disclose the DVAC manual. The judgment emphasized the importance of transparency and accountability in public authorities, particularly regarding allegations of corruption. The court reiterated that even exempted organizations like the DVAC must disclose information related to corruption and human rights violations as per the provisos to Section 24(4) of the RTI Act.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Exemption of Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) from the Right to Information Act (RTI Act).
2. Applicability of Section 24(4) and its provisos concerning allegations of corruption and human rights violations.
3. Interpretation of Sections 2(f), 4(1)(b)(v), and 8 of the RTI Act.
4. Validity of the Tamil Nadu Information Commission's order directing the disclosure of the DVAC manual.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Exemption of DVAC from the RTI Act:
The petitioner argued that the DVAC was exempted from the RTI Act under G.O. Ms. No. 158, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated 26-8-2008, issued under Section 24(4) of the RTI Act. This exemption was upheld by the court in W.P. No. 4907 of 2009 on 30-3-2009. Therefore, the petitioner contended that the authorities were correct in refusing to provide the first respondent with a copy of the DVAC manual.

2. Applicability of Section 24(4) and its Provisos:
The respondent argued that the provisos to Section 24(4) of the RTI Act stipulate that information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights violations is not excluded from disclosure. This was supported by a Division Bench judgment in The Superintendent of Police, Central Range, Office of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption v. R. Karthikeyan and Others, 2011 (3) CTC 241, which held that the exemption does not apply to information related to corruption. The court agreed, noting that the provisos to Section 24(4) clearly state that even if an organization is exempted, information regarding corruption and human rights violations must be disclosed.

3. Interpretation of Sections 2(f), 4(1)(b)(v), and 8 of the RTI Act:
The court examined the definitions and obligations under these sections:
- Section 2(f) defines "information" to include any material in any form, including records, documents, and manuals.
- Section 4(1)(b)(v) mandates public authorities to maintain and disclose rules, regulations, instructions, manuals, and records for discharging their functions.
- Section 8 lists exemptions to the obligation of providing information but does not include the DVAC manual.

The court concluded that the DVAC manual falls within the definition of "information" under Section 2(f) and is not exempted under Section 8.

4. Validity of the Tamil Nadu Information Commission's Order:
The Tamil Nadu Information Commission directed the petitioner to furnish a copy of the DVAC manual to the first respondent. The court found no infirmity in this order, noting that the manual is a set of rules on how the DVAC functions and should not be kept secret. The court emphasized that the information sought by the respondent pertains to corruption, which is not exempted under the RTI Act.

Conclusion:
The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Tamil Nadu Information Commission's order to disclose the DVAC manual. The court reiterated that the provisos to Section 24(4) mandate the disclosure of information related to corruption and human rights violations, even for exempted organizations like the DVAC. The judgment underscores the importance of transparency and accountability in public authorities, particularly concerning allegations of corruption.

---