Not Rare for Courts to Revoke Decision

Last instance was when High Court ruled that activists must spell out reasons for seeking information under Right to Information Act

Published: 12th July 2015 03:30 AM  |   Last Updated: 12th July 2015 03:30 AM   |  A+A-

CHENNAI: A court repealing its orders is not something that happens very often, but there have been a few instances in the past where a court has had to resort to this measure. Before the order by Justice P Devadass on Friday repealing his interim direction sending a rape case to mediation, the most recent instance was in September, when a division bench of the Madras High Court withdrew its directive that activists must spell out reasons for seeking information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

A division bench of Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar (now Chief Justice of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir) and Justice K Ravichandrabaabu, through their order dated September 17, had held that a person who seeks information under the RTI Act must show whether the information sought is either for his personal interest or for a public cause.

If the detail is absent or undisclosed, such query cannot be construed as one satisfying the requirement of the RTI Act, they added.

In a detailed follow up on September 20, Express analysed the order’s contradiction with the legislation, wherein a particular provision of the RTI Act itself says that the applicant making request for information shall not be required to give any reason for requesting the information.

The report set off widespread debate across the nation. Subsequently, on September 23, admitting the error, the court decided to withdraw its order stating: “We made certain general observations stating that the RTI application should contain bare minimum details or reasons for which the information is sought for. However, the said general observations were made without noticing Sec. 6(2) of RTI Act.”

Passing the orders, the bench said that they are convinced that the general observations made in the said order are against the existing provisions of the RTI Act and they have to be removed.

Besides, there has also been a case where a judge of the High Court issued an unusual gag order after one of his verdicts related to sexual relationship and marital legitimacy sparked a furore. “Without fully understanding this court’s judgment, adverse comments shall not be passed,” read the gag order two years ago.

Stay up to date on all the latest Tamil Nadu news with The New Indian Express App. Download now
(Get the news that matters from New Indian Express on WhatsApp. Click this link and hit 'Click to Subscribe'. Follow the instructions after that.)


Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp