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

2017 Supreme(Del) 3933

VIBHU BAKHRU
KAMAL BHASIN – Appellant
Versus
RADHA KRISHNA MATHUR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Respondent:Mr. Ruchir Mishra and Mr. Abhishek Rana, Advocates.

ORDER :

VIBHU BAKHRU, J.

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 05.04.2016 (hereafter ‘the impugned order’) passed by the Central Information Commission (CIC), whereby the petitioner’s second appeal preferred under Section 19(3) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereafter ‘the Act’) against the order dated 13.03.2014 passed by the First Appellate Authority (hereafter ‘FAA’), was rejected. By the said order dated 13.03.2014, the FAA had in turn rejected the petitioner’s appeal against denial of information by the CPIO.

2. The petitioner and several other persons including PFC Officers Association had filed complaints against Sh Satnam Singh, who was then Chairman-cum-Managing Director of M/s Power Finance Corporation Ltd (hereafter ‘PFC’). The petitioner sought certain information relating to the manner in which the complaints were dealt with and action taken on the complaints made. His request was denied on the ground that disclosure of such information was exempted by virtue of Section 8(1)(j) of the Act. The petitioner being aggrieved by the non-disclosure of the information has filed the present petition. Although, the petitioner























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