RTI Cannot Be Used to Compel Creation or Compilation of Information Not in the Record
Judgment dated 29.10.2026 of the High Court of Delhi in W.P. [C No.7340 of 20111 of Public Information Officer Vs. P.D. Gupta
The respondent former Judicial Officer applied to the PIO for details of all cases heard by the Hon’ble Judge in which the judgment was delivered more than two months after conclusion of the arguments.
Public Information Officer (hereafter referred to as ‘PIO’) under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereafter ‘RTI Act’) vide Diary No. 115/09. In query 5(2), the respondent stated that in W.P.(C) 2362/2002, filed by him against this Court, arguments were heard on 31.07.2007 by a Division Bench presided over by then Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri, and the judgment was pronounced on 02.05.2008.
The principal controversy herein is whether the learned CIC could have directed the petitioner to locate and furnish the information sought, when the consistent stand of the petitioner is that no such record is maintained or compiled.
- Moreover, furnishing the information sought by the respondent would require the petitioner to examine the records of all the cases heard by a particular Judge, whether sitting singly or in a Division Bench, to calculate the time taken in each case, and to prepare a fresh list. This would amount to collecting and collating information, which, as held in Aditya Bandopadhyay (supra), the public authority is not obliged to do. The learned CIC itself noted that such an exercise would be impossible and would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority. Restricting the period to two years does not change the nature of the exercise.
