Kochi Oct 28 — The Kerala High Court on Wednesday sought clarification from the state government on whether vigilance inquiries against public officials are covered by an exemption granted to two sections of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice V.M. Syam Kumar directed the government to file an affidavit detailing the categories of information handled by the T1 and T2 sections, which were exempted through a notification issued on October 22.
The court observed that the two sections dealt with vigilance inquiries, intelligence inputs, search reports and other information relating to vigilance proceedings.
It said some of this information could be sensitive but sought specific clarification on whether inquiries against officials fell within its remit.
The matter will be considered again after three weeks.
The public interest litigation challenges the government's decision to bring the two sections under the exemption.
The petitioner contends that the VACB is primarily a criminal investigation agency that probes corruption offences involving public servants and cannot be classified as an intelligence or security organisation merely by administrative notification.
Section 24(4) of the RTI Act allows state governments to exempt specified intelligence and security organisations through notifications published in the Official Gazette.
The petitioner pointed out that the VACB was not among the eight organisations originally exempted under a government order dated February 7, 2006.
The plea alleges that VACB information officers have begun rejecting requests concerning vigilance inquiries, preliminary verifications, closure reports and sanctions for prosecution, citing the October 22 notification.
It argues that the RTI Act already provides exemptions to protect sensitive information, including material whose disclosure could impede investigations or endanger individuals.
A blanket exemption for the two sections could restrict public scrutiny of the state's anti-corruption machinery, the petitioner contends.
During the hearing, the petitioner cited a recent Supreme Court ruling in Special Police Establishment vs Kamta Prasad Mishra and Others, arguing that an agency investigating corruption cannot automatically be treated as an intelligence and security organisation under Section 24(4).
The petitioner also submitted that a similar notification had been withdrawn by the state government in 2016 after it was challenged before the High Court.
The plea seeks quashing of the October 22 notification and continued application of the RTI Act to the two sections for information not otherwise exempt under law.
The High Court has not yet ruled on the validity of the notification.