BISWAJIT CHOWDHURY vs CPIO SUPREME COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3849/2025 Date of Decision: 13.02.2026 IN THE MATTER OF: BISWAJIT CHOWDHURY .....Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person. Versus CPIO SUPREME COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Counsel (appearance not given) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV JUDGEMENT PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL) The petitioner seems to have filed the application under Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter “RTI Act”) on 14.05.2023 seeking certain information. 2. This information essentially relates to the approved guidelines by the Supreme Court on conducting the mediation related to child access/custody, parenting and various other allied information. 3. The Chief Public Information officer, Supreme Court Legal Services Authorities, (hereinafter „CPIO‟) vide letter dated 14.07.2023, replied to the petitioner. The petitioner being dissatisfied with the said reply filed the first Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified Signed By:NEHA CHOPRA Signed Signing Date:17.02.2026 By:PURUSHAINDRA 19:52:32 KUMAR KAURAV appeal and the First Appellate Authority of Supreme Court of India vide order dated 28.03.2023 has held that it is beyond the jurisdiction and scope of the duties of CPIO, Supreme Court of India under RTI to take action against any authority or to direct any authority to take action or to give information, opine, comment or advise on matters, etc. 4. It was also stated that an appropriate reply was furnished to the petitioner and no further information with that regard on the part of CPIO, Supreme Court of India was called for. 5. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said order approached the Second Appellate Authority, i.e., Central Information Commission (hereinafter „C