Lahore Electric Supply Company v. Federation of Pakistan and others

Background

Background

In 2026 LHC 5409, the Lahore High Court held that meeting minutes lose their section 7(b) exclusion after the public body takes a final decision.

An applicant sought certified minutes of two LESCO meetings concerning an officer's promotion. LESCO withheld the record under sections 7 and 16. The Pakistan Information Commission held that the promotion decision had been finalized and directed disclosure within ten days. LESCO challenged that order under Article 199.

Questions of concluded deliberations, privacy and severability

Questions of concluded deliberations, privacy and severability

Whether minutes of a public body's meetings remain excluded under section 7(b) after the relevant final decision has been taken, and whether privacy or deliberative-process exemptions justify withholding the complete record.

Court holding

What the Court decided

No. The section 7(b) exclusion is conditional and ceases when the public body takes the final decision. A section 16 exemption must be independently proved. Any genuinely protected part may be severed, but the presence of possible private or deliberative material does not justify withholding the entire record.

Final outcome

Final outcome

The writ petition was dismissed. The Pakistan Information Commission's order directing LESCO to provide the requested meeting minutes within ten days was left intact. There was no order as to costs.

Practical effect

What the decision means in practice

The writ petition was dismissed. The Pakistan Information Commission's order directing LESCO to provide the requested meeting minutes within ten days was left intact. There was no order as to costs.

This summary states the immediate effect recorded in the decision. The original judgment and the facts of the particular case remain controlling.

Key legal principles

Key legal principles

• The exclusion of meeting minutes under section 7(b) is conditional, not permanent, and ceases when the public body takes the final decision to which the minutes relate.
• Sections 6 and 7 must be read harmoniously; treating minutes as permanently excluded would make the statutory words subject to a final decision redundant.
• A section 16 exemption operates independently and must satisfy its own statutory conditions after the section 7(b) exclusion has ended.
• The deliberative-process exemption requires proof that disclosure is likely to cause the specified prejudice; the mere presence of deliberation is insufficient.
• An official promotion matter does not make the entire record private merely because an identifiable employee is involved.
• Where only part of a record is exempt, section 16 requires severance of the protected part and disclosure of the residual record.
• Section 11(5) prevents a public body from requiring an applicant to give reasons or prove a personal interest in the information.
• The Information Commission may order disclosure and take reasonable implementation measures under sections 19 and 20.
• Under section 17(4), the public body bears the burden of proving in an appeal that its refusal complied with the Act.

Pakistan relevance

Pakistan relevance

For federal RTI practice, counsel should identify whether the underlying decision is final, challenge blanket reliance on section 7(b), require proof of any section 16 harm and insist on passage-specific severance rather than complete withholding. Public bodies should record the precise statutory basis for each redaction and should not demand an applicant's motive.