SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Bom) 1127

C.V.BHADANG
State Public Information Officer, Deputy Director of Vigilance, Panaji-Goa – Appellant
Versus
Vinesh V Arlekar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Pravin Faldessai, Adv., A.D. Bhobe, Adv., Annelise Fernandes, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

C.V. Bhadang, J.

Rule, made returnable forthwith. Mr. Bhobe, learned Counsel waives service on behalf of the contesting respondent no.1. Heard finally by consent of parties.

2. The challenge in this petition is to the common order dated 16.11.2018 passed by the Goa State Information Commission (Commission, for short) in Appeal Nos.161/2018/CIC and 162/2018/CIC and the subsequent common order dated 07.01.2019 in Review Appeal No.01/2018/CIC and Review Appeal No.2/2018/CIC.

3. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the petition may be stated thus.

The first respondent filed two applications before the Public Information Officer (PIO) under Section 6(1) and 7(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, (Act, for short). The first of such applications was filed on 12.01.2018 and the second one on 18.01.2018. By these applications, the petitioner sought certified copies of the entire file (notings side and the correspondence side) of enquiry/investigation conducted by the Anti Corruption Branch (ACB) and Technical Section of the Directorate of Vigilance against the petitioner. The information was in relation to a complaint dated 21.11.2011 filed by Mr. Jayesh Patel and Smt

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top