1. By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the Petitioner a practicing Advocate has prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records and after scrutiny thereof, to quash and set aside the orders dated 8th November 2010, 28th February 2011 and 18th July 2012 Annexures B, D and E to this Writ Petition.

2. The Petitioner is a citizen of India and as stated above, a practicing Advocate. He states that out of sheer respect and regard for this institution that he has filed this Writ Petition. He does not wish to derive any personal benefit but, has moved the Court with a desire that the administration of justice in Court as also otherwise should be transparent, fair and reasonable. Once the Right to Information Act, 2005 has been brought into effect then the Act would mandate even this Court on its administrative side to make available, disclose the information and which is referred in the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

3. It is in furtherance of this legislation and provisions thereof, that the Petitioner made an application seeking information. A copy of this application is at Annexure 'A' to this Writ Petition and information which is sought therein with which we are concerned in the Writ Petition. The said information and details thereof are at pages 24 and 25 of the paper book. It is as follows :

“The following queries are raised to gauge whether there is any truth in the aforesaid perception which is so pervasive and lamented by many an eminent men :

1. What is the total strength of Judges in the Bombay High Court ? What is the approved/sanctioned strength ? What is the method and procedure of filling the vacancies of Judges ?

2. Are applications/proposals called for from eligible lawyers, subordinate Judges, the government, Media or any other source ? If yes, please name the source/s.

3. If any written suggestions are called for as to the eligibility of the candidate, kindly name the entities or association from whom such suggestions are sought.

4. Is the selection a confidential one and if yes, who are the people privy to the selection ?

5. When could the public ever come to know abut the selection of any person as a Judge of the High Court? Kindly specify.

6. Is there any procedure where the public could offer suggestion as to the eligibility of a particular candidate and if such opportunity is available to the public then particulars of the opportunity to raise objections.

7. How many of the Judges of the Bombay High Court have their immediate relations such as father, father-in-law, mother, mother-in-law uncle, aunt, brother, brother-in-law, sister, sister-in-law, co-brother, Chief Minister, ex-Chief Minister, Governor, ex-Governor, President, ex-president, Judge of Supreme Court, ex-Judge of Supreme Court, Judge of High Court, ex-Judge of High Court, Union Cabinet Minster, ex-Union Cabinet Minister, Minister of State, ex-MOF etc ?

8. Kindly furnish the particulars of those Judges who have relation is holding high constitutional office as Union Minster, Governor, Judge of High Court, Supreme Court etc, as in query to above.

9. It may be possible a Judge may have ore than one such person who holds or have held such high constitutional office. Kindly name the Judges who come under this category. If more than one, please name how may.

10. It is said that Hon'ble Shri Justice Majmudar has five of his immediate relatives as Judges of different High Courts and the Supreme Court. Kindly furnish names of those Judges.

IV. A Resolution called “Restatement of judicial values” (also called the Code of Conduct) was adopted by Judges of the Supreme Court in 1977 to declare their assets in confidence to the Chief Justice of India. This was reiterated in 1999 in a conference of the Chief Justices of India. It is reliably learnt that many High Court have also adopted the said Resolution.

V. In the above background, the following queri