Back
Karnataka High Court
Judges : S.Abdul Nazeer
POORNAPRAJNA HOUSE BUILDING COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. - Appellant
Versus
KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSION - Respondent
W. P. 7408 Of 2006
Decided On : 03/30/2007
Advocates Appeared :
AAREN, B.Veerappa, N.N.HARISH, PUTTIGE R.RAMESH
Cases Referred: AIR 1965 SC 1595; AIR 1954 Bombay 33; AIR 1999 SC 976.
Practice and Procedure - Necessary party - Order of a tribunal - Challenge to - Tribunal should be made a party. Dilatory Settled Principles: when-ever a writ is sought challenging the order of a Tribunal, the Tribunal must always be a necessary party to the petition. It is difficult to understand how under any circumstances the Tribunal would not be a necessary party when the petitioner wants the order of the Tribunal to be quashed or to be cal-led in question. It is equally clear that all parties affected by that order should also bed necessary par- ties to the petition [AIR 1954 Bom 33].
Cases Referred: AIR 1965 SC 1595; AIR 1954 Bombay 33; AIR 1999 SC 976. Cases Relied: AIR 1963 SC 786.
Judicial Powers - Nature of - Are powers inherently vested in a sovereign State. Dilatory Settled Principles: judicial functions and judicial powers are one of the essential attributes of a sovereign State, and on considerations of policy, the State transfers its judicial functions and powers mainly to the Courts established by the Constitution; but that does not affect the competence of the State, by appropriate measures to transfer a part of the judicial powers and functions to the tribunals by entrusting to them the task of adjudicating upon special matters and disputes between the parties. The basic and the fundamental feature, which is common to both the Courts and tribunals is that they discharge judicial functions and exercise judicial powers which inherently vest in a sovereign State [AIR 1965 SC 1595].
Cases Referred: AIR 1965 SC 1595; AIR 1954 Bombay 33; AIR 1999 SC 976. Cases Relied: AIR 1963 SC 786.
Judicial Review - Statutory authorities - Acts of - Amenable to writ jurisdiction.
Cases Referred: AIR 1965 SC 1595; AIR 1954 Bombay 33; AIR 1999 SC 976. Cases Relied: AIR 1963 SC 786.
Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 18 - Enquiry under - Central Information Commission and state Information Commission - Powers of - Have same power as are vested in a civil court while trying a suit under CPC.
Cases Referred: AIR 1965 SC 1595; AIR 1954 Bombay 33; AIR 1999 SC 976. Cases Relied: AIR 1963 SC 786.
Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 19(3) - Necessary party - Writ against order of State Information commission - Commission should be impleaded as a party. [S.Abdul Nazeer, J]: Certiorari lies to remove for the purpose of quashing the proceedings of inferior courts of record or other persons or bodies exercising judicial or quasi-judicial act as distinguished from an administrative act. A writ of certiorari will be granted to remove the record of proceedings of an inferior Tribunal or authority exercising judicial or quasi-judicial acts. It follows that the High court in exercising its jurisdiction shall also act judicially in disposing of the proceedings before it. In such proceedings, the Tribunal or the authority, which is permitted to transmit the records must be a party, because without giving notice to it, the record of the proceedings cannot be brought to the High Court. It is true that in an appeal against a decree of a Subordinate Court, the Court that passed the decree need not be made a party. But, there is a distinction between an appeal against a decree of a Subordinate Court or a writ of certiorari to quash the order of a Tribunal or authority. In the former, the proceedings are regulated by the Code of Civil Procedure and the Court making the order is directly subordinate to the appellate court and ordinarily acts within its bounds. In the Case of Writ Petition, a writ of certiorari is issued to quash the order of the Tribunal, which is ordinarily outside the appellate or the revisional jurisdiction of the Court and the order is set aside on the ground that the Tribunal or authority acted without or in excess of jurisdiction If such a Tribunal or authority is not made a party to the writ, it can easily ignore the order of the High Court quashing its order, for not being a party, it will not be liable to contempt.
Cases Referred: AIR 1965 SC 1595; AIR 1954 Bombay 33; AIR 1999 SC 976. Cases Relied: AIR 1963 SC 786.
Right to Information Act, 2005-Preamble-Object of the Act-Stated. [S.Abdul Nazeer, J]: Right to Information Act, 2005 is an Act to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for the citizens to secure access to information under the Control of Public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority, the constitution of a Central Information Commission and State Information Co-mmissions and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
Cases Referred: AIR 1965 SC 1595; AIR 1954 Bombay 33; AIR 1999 SC 976. Cases Relied: AIR 1963 SC 786.
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 96 - Appeal against decree - Writ of certiorari - Distinction between - Stated. [S.Abdul Nazeer, J]: It is true that in an appeal against a decree of a Subordinate Court, the Court that passed the decree need not be made a party. But, there is a distinction between an appeal against a decree of a Subordinate Court or a writ of certiorari to quash the order of a Tribunal or authority. In the former, the proceedings are regulated by the Code of Civil Procedure and the Court making the order is directly subordinate to the appellate court and ordinarily acts within its bounds. In the Case of Writ Petition, a writ of certiorari is issued to quash the order of the Tribunal, which is ordinarily outside the appellate or the revisional jurisdiction of the Court and the order is set aside on the ground that the Tribunal or authority acted without or in excess of jurisdiction.
Cases Referred: AIR 1965 SC 1595; AIR 1954 Bombay 33; AIR 1999 SC 976. Cases Relied: AIR 1963 SC 786.
Constitution of India - Article 226-Certiorari - Writ of - When lies. [S.Abdul Nazeer, J]: Certiorari lies to remove for the purpose of quashing the proceedings of inferior courts of record or other persons or bodies exercising judicial or quasi-judicial act as distinguished from an administrative act. A writ of certiorari will be granted to remove the record of proceedings of an inferior Tribunal or authority exercising judicial or quasi-judicial acts.
Cases Referred: AIR 1965 SC 1595; AIR 1954 Bombay 33; AIR 1999 SC 976. Cases Relied: AIR 1963 SC 786.
Constitution of India - Article 227 - Powers of High Court - Article confers on every High Court Power of superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which they exercise jurisdiction exepting any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to armed forces.
Cases Referred: AIR 1965 SC 1595; AIR 1954 Bombay 33; AIR 1999 SC 976. Cases Relied: AIR 1963 SC 786.
Practice and Procedure - Necessary and proper party - Meaning and distinction - See, Words and Phrases.
Cases Referred: AIR 1965 SC 1595; AIR 1954 Bombay 33; AIR 1999 SC 976. Cases Relied: AIR 1963 SC 786.
( 2 ) PETITIONER is a Co-operative Society registered under the provisions of the Karnataka co-operative Societies Act, 1959. The second respondent is a member of the petitioner- society. He had filed two applications dated 7-11-2005 and 17-11-2005 in Form A under sections 6 (1) and 7 (1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short 'rti Act') seeking certain information and documents pertaining to the functioning of the Society including personal details of its members. The society rejected the said application by the order dated 6-12-2005. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the second respondent filed an appeal before the President of the petitioner- society presuming that he is an appellate authority under Section 19 (1) of the RTI Act. The appeal was rejected on the ground that the Society is not a public authority under section 2 (h) of the RTI Act. The 2nd respondent filed a second appeal to the Commission under Section 19 (3) of the RTI Act. The Commission has issued notice to the Society and the Society has filed its objections. After hearing the parties, the Commission has passed the impugned order.
( 3 ) WHEN the matter came up for orders on 9-6-2005, the learned Additional Government advocate accepted notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 3 and emergent notice was issued to respondent No. 2. On 19-7-2006 when the matter was posted again for orders. the learned Additional Government Advocate made a submission that he has no instruction to appear for respondent No. 1 - the Commission. Therefore, emergent notice was issued to respondent No. 1. In response to the notice, the Commission has sent a letter addressed to the Registrar of this Court on 7-8-2006 stating that the Commission should not be made a party to the writ petition filed against its orders on the ground that it is not an interested party. The Commission has requested this Court to drop its name from the list of the respondents.
( 4 ) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties, the question that arises for consideration is whether the petitioner is justified in making the 'commission' as a party (respondent) to this writ petition?
( 5 ) RIGHT to Information Act, 2005 is an act to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for the citizens to secure access to information under the Control of Public Authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority, the constitution of a Central Information Commission and state Information Commissions and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. Section 15 of the RTI Act provides for constitution of State Information commission. It consists of State Chief Information Commissioner and such number of State information commissioners, not exceeding ten as may be deemed necessary.
( 6 ) POWERS and functions of the Information Commission are enumerated in Section 18 of the RTI Act, Sub-section (3) of Section 18 of the RTI Act states that the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission while inquiring into the matter under that Section have the same power as are vested in the Civil Court while trying the suit under the Code of Civil Procedure. The said provision is as under :
" (3) The Central Information Commission or vstate Information Commission, as the case may be shall, while inquiring into any matter under this section, have the same powers as are vested in a civil Court while trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in respect of the following matters, namely :- (a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of persons and compel them to give oral or written evidence on oath and to produce the documents or
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
