Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

13. Despite the contention of PIO that the CRS Division of Registrar General, India cannot be held to be the custodian of ward wise data as sought by the appellant, the Commission finds that role of Registrar General in implementation of the RBD Act cannot be lost sight of.

14. The Commission finds that the present controversy is limited to only practices of data maintenance and preservation. There is no legal impediment in creation of two or more equally effective access points of information both at central as well as state level. It is rather a question of 'data mirroring' and the essential question raised in the present case requires forging new practices of data management which is in furtherance of RBD Act as well as RTI Act. The Commission also takes note of the submission of the PIO that it is comparatively difficult to register data of deaths with cause of death; as in contrast to data regarding births.

15. The judicious aggregation as well as preservation of 'data of death' is very important for the ensuring the quality of life of the living. The data is a crucial indicator of various factors which is a key for ensuring good governance and efficient policy planning. The Commission sees no reason to deny access of such important data to citizenry at large in a manner which facilitates a social audit of the quality of life across social & regional level. An information seeker must be able to know the precise data if deaths & births right from the fundamental unit such as village & wards. The whole process of registration would be rendered futile if, we as nation do not have access to the data recorded at each level of social existence.