Centre’s stance sought in plea on China incursion RTI

The petitioner emphasised before the Delhi HC that the State derives its sovereign functions from the people who have the right to know the status of their territorial integrity.
Delhi High Court. (File photo)
Delhi High Court. (File photo)

NEW DELHI:  The Delhi High Court on Monday sought the response of the Centre on a plea moved by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy after the Ministry of Home Affairs allegedly refused to “consider” his Right to Information (RTI) plea seeking information regarding Chinese encroachment on Indian territory.
Issuing notice to the Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Defence and the Central Information Commission, Justice Subramonium Prasad posted the matter for further hearing on January 8.

“Today in Delhi High Court, Justice S. Prasad issued notice to the Modi Government to answer my RTI question on whether or not Chinese troops have captured undisputed Indian territory in Ladakh since April 2020,” Swamy later posted on social media platform ‘X’ (formerly Twitter). Swamy filed the RTI application on November 10, 2022, seeking answers to an array of questions.

“What extent of the sovereign land of the Republic of India has been acquired by the People’s Republic of China by India, across 1996 mutually agreed upon Line of Actual Control? Kindly provide a map of the same,” the first question in the RTI read. It further asked, “What extent of India’s sovereign land has been ceded to China due to further creation of buffer zones or ‘no man’s land’, across the mutually agreed upon Line of Actual Control in 1996? Kindly provide a map of the same.”

“What extent of India‘s sovereign land has been ceded to the People’s Republic of China since 2014? Kindly provide a map of the same, each year wise,” read another question. The petition alleged that no response was received to the RTI application, which was transferred from one department to another, leading Swamy to first file the appeal under the RTI Act and then approach the Chief Information Commissioner.

“Nearly six months after filing the second appeal, the petitioner has not received any response whatsoever,” the petition claimed, adding that the denial of information sought by him violates article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution of India. The petitioner also emphasised that the State derives its sovereign functions from the people who have the right to know the status of their territorial integrity.

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com