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

DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddiqui – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Table of Content
1. petitioner's request under rti act regarding books. (Para 1 , 2)
2. government's willingness to facilitate book delivery. (Para 3 , 4)
3. rule on facilities allowed to convicts. (Para 5)
4. order for book supply to jail. (Para 6 , 7)

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--The petitioner had written a letter dated 27th April 2012 to the Hon'ble Chief Justice of this Court invoking the writ jurisdiction under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. The letter stated that the Petitioner had sought under the RTI Act, 2005, from the Central Council for Research in Homeopathy (`Homeopathy Council'), either hard copies of homeopathy books or soft copies thereof. The said request was rejected by the CPIO on two grounds - i.e., in respect of hard copies, on the ground that the same could not be supplied free of cost, and for electronic copies the request was rejected on the ground that there would be violation of the Copyright Act. Both the first and the second appellate authority had concurred with the CPIO of the Homeopathy Council. Hence the letter dated 27th April 2012.

2. In the letter, the Petitioner stated that he was a person from below the poverty line and was in co

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