Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
Yesterday, The Madras high court directed the Central Information Commission(CIC) to immediately dispose of an appeal against the non-supply of information regarding the personal data protection bill 2019 of the central government. A single bench of Justice M.Govindaraj directed the CIC to reject the said appeal within a period of one month If the bill is to be placed in front of the ongoing budget session at the parliament.
The aim of the personal data protection bill is to ensure the privacy of every Indian citizen and it proposes to establish a data protection authority for the same. Initially, it was introduced in the parliament on December 11, 2019. It is presently under consideration of the joint parliamentary committee.
Recently, the Lok Sabha granted an extended time period for the committee to submit its report, the committee now has to submit its report by March 14th i.e) the first week of the second part of the ongoing budget session. So, there is no clarity as to whether this bill will be presented by the parliament in this session.
It is also noted that former supreme court judge: Justice BN Srikrishna, who has studied extensively on issues relating to the regulation of data protection. He has expressed his concerns over the personal data protection bill. He has remarked that the personal data protection bill has watered down the provisions, which allows the state to infringe the fundamental right to privacy under the name of sovereignty.
In the case at hand, Saurav Das as journalist has filed an application under the right to information act with the CPIO(Central Public Information Officer)seeking information regarding the personal data protection bill. So that he can make objections to the bill after receiving information regarding the same. On August 31, 2020, the concerned CPIO refused to provide any information stating that the documents are confidential. After that Das filed an appeal to the first appellate authority which was dismissed, He again filed a second appeal to the Union ministry, which is pending to date. Therefore he approached the CIC for an immediate hearing but the request was not accepted, this is how the present writ proceeding was initiated. The high court after considering the facts of the case held that:
“If the Bill is going to be placed in the ongoing session, the first respondent is directed to dispose of the Second Appeal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”
86540
103860
630
114
59824