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

2017 Supreme(Del) 234

SANJEEV SACHDEVA
B. B. DASH – Appellant
Versus
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Aditya Singh with Mr. Raju Dalal, Advocates

JUDGMENT :

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

CM No. 2874/2017 (exemption)

Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 624/2017 & CM No.2873/2017 (stay)

1. The petitioner impugns order dated 22.11.2016, whereby, the CIC has held the petitioner – CPIO liable for not providing the information to the respondents. It has been held that the petitioner has failed to provide information without any cogent reasons. Maximum penalty, as prescribed, of Rs.25,000/- has been imposed on the petitioner.

2. The respondent No.2 had filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) dated 25.08.2015 seeking certain information. The reply to the said information was given on 28.09.2015. The queries and the replies thereto are as under:-

“ICAR-Proiect Directorate on Foot and Mouth Disease Information sought under Right to Information on Foot and Mouth Disease

3AB3 DIVA Statement of Cost Sheet for the year 2012-13 by Dimpal Kaushik

The above referred Right to Information reads as under:

A: Please inform weather the above document and/or its contents are in the knowledge of ICAR Team at Headquarters at Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi (Yes or NO)?

Ans: It is an institute

























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