send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
• The Court appeared as a litigant before its judicial avatar and argued against transparency and eventually ruled against itself.
• The verdict pushes towards greater judicial accountability.
• While the government discloses its reasons for not accepting the collegium’s recommendations, the judiciary’s defence remains absent from the public debate.
• The ruling allows for an ordinary citizen to seek information on appointments, transfers of judges to the high courts and Supreme Court.
• But the reasons behind these recommendations could still be clouded in secrecy as the decisions of the collegium are largely based on reports of the Intelligence Bureau which is exempted from providing information under RTI.
• The verdict itself asks information commissioners to keep in mind the right to privacy and the independence of the judiciary while deciding on RTI requests.
• Even when former CJI Dipak Misra decided that collegium decisions will be published on the Supreme Court website, CJI Ranjan Gogoi signalled a departure from the practice after 256 decisions were published.
By: VISHAL GOYAL ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources
New Courses