Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI, J
Ranjeet Kumar Bafana – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
(NUPUR BHATI, J.)
1. The instant writ petition under Article 226, Constitution of India has been filed with the following prayer:
“It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed with cost and by an appropriate writ, order or direction:-
(A) By an appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned letter dated 01.08.2022 (Ann.7), impugned order dated 21.09.2022 (Ann.9) and the imagined judgment 31.08.2023 (Ann.14) may kindly be quashed and set aside.
(B) By an appropriate writ order or direction, the respondent no.2 may kindly be directed to provide the information sought by the petitioner vide his application dated 12.07.2022 under the provisions of RTI Act.
(C) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted in favour of petitioner.”
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner filed an application dated 12.07.2022 (Annex.5) under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (‘RTI Act’) seeking information regarding all the proceedings undertaken in pursuance to the complaint dated 12.12.2019 (Annex.1) filed by the peti
Personal information under RTI Act is exempt from disclosure unless public interest outweighs privacy concerns.
Judicial officers' complaints are personal information exempt from RTI disclosure unless public interest justifies it.
The Right to Information Act protects personal information from disclosure unless a larger public interest is established.
Information regarding employee performance is considered personal and exempt from disclosure under the RTI Act unless public interest outweighs privacy concerns.
Information related to disciplinary proceedings and confidential reports of public servants is categorized as personal information and exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Inf....
Public authorities must provide clear reasons to justify the withholding of information under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act based on how it impedes investigations; mere assertions are insufficient.
The burden is on the public authority to show how disclosure of information could impede the investigation or prosecution under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
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
