was passed by the Supreme Court on January 8, 1992. directing that if any Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) bus or any private bus on the fleet of DTC is found emitting excessive smoke, that fact may be brought to the notice of a DTC officer to be named under the intimation to the Registrar of the Supreme Court and on receipt of the information from any member of the public the DTC Officer concerned will immediately have the bus checked up and intimate the action taken’ to the Registrar of the Supreme Court. It is submitted that the problem of monitoring pollution is a difficult one. The technique of appointing commission to enquire into the details of vehicular technologies for pollution control and the mechanism of monitoring of pollution as desired by the court is a welcome move.” Since government is not committed to an honest and sincere task regarding monitoring of pollution, the responsibility to a great extent will have to be shared by voluntary organizations or public spirited citizens as well. Conclusion There is close lint between the government accountability and a citizen’s ability to secure authentic information. Public access to government information in democratic society is desirable as it enables citizens to exercise their political choice more meaningfully. It not only helps to check the abuse of executive power but influences the decision-making process to a better direction wherein an atmosphere of ope23nness the government can mend administrative follies. The right to know at the same time in addition to improving the quality of decision making also strengthens participatory democracy. On the contrary, secrecy erodes the legitimacy of elected government by providing a cover to conceal its misdeeds. Actions and policies of Government cannot in such situation be fairly judged by electorate. Consequently, accountability of the former is greatly inhibited.>