Back
2022 Supreme(Jhk) 1344
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RAJESH SHANKAR, J.
Pawan Kumar Agarwal - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand through its Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand and Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 3729 of 2021
Decided On : 18-02-2022
For the Petitioner: Mr. A.K. Sahani.
For the Respondents: Mr. Nehru Mahato, Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, A.C. to Mr. Sanjay Piprawall.
The lack of provision empowering the authorities to reconsider their orders refusing to supply documents under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Headnote:
Right to Information Act, 2005 - Quashing of Order - Denial of Documents relating to Minutes of Meeting of General Body of Marwari Panchayat, Chas
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition to quash the order declining to provide documents relating to minutes of meeting of General Body of Marwari Panchayat, Chas under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no substance in the submission that the Jharkhand State Information Commission had not yet started functioning, and stated that there is no provision empowering the Public Information Officer or the first appellate authority to reconsider their orders refusing to supply the documents to an information seeker under the Act, 2005. The court also noted that the second appeal preferred by the petitioner against the orders of the Public Information Officer and the First Appellate Authority is pending before the Commission.
Issues: The main issue was the denial of documents relating to minutes of meeting of General Body of Marwari Panchayat, Chas under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of provision empowering the authorities to reconsider their orders refusing to supply documents and the pending second appeal before the Commission.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed as devoid of merit.
ORDER :
The present case is taken up through video conferencing.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing order dated 13.11.2019 (Annexure-10 to the writ petition) passed by the first appellate authority declining to provide documents relating to minutes of meeting of General Body of Marwari Panchayat, Chas asked by the petitioner under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (in short, “the Act, 2005”) or in alternative to direct the respondent no. 3 to provide information as sought by him within a specified period.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the content of the writ petition.
4. The petitioner earlier filed a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 48 of 2021 for issuance of direction upon the Chief Information Commissioner, Jharkhand State Information Commission, Ranchi (the respondent no. 2 herein) to consider the second appeal preferred by him under Section 19 (3) of the Act, 2005. The said second appeal was preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 13.11.2019 passed by the first appellate authority declining to provide the documents asked by the petitioner under the said Act.
5. W.P.(C) No. 48 of 2021 was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 03.03.2021 with a direction to place the matter before appropriate Bench of the Jharkhand State Information Commission, Ranchi as soon as the same assumes functioning.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition primarily for the reason that the Jharkhand State Information Commission, Ranchi has not yet started functioning and due to which, the required information is not being furnished to the petitioner. Hence, the prayer made in the present writ petition may be considered.
7. I find no substance in the said submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. There is no such provision in the Act, 2005 or the Rules framed thereunder empowering the Public Information Officer or the first appellate authority to reconsider their orders refusing to supply the documents to an information seeker under the said Act. Otherwise also, the second appeal preferred by the petitioner against the orders of the Public Information Officer as well as the First Appellate Authority is pending before the Commission on which the direction as mentioned hereinabove has already been issued by this Court.
8. The writ petition being devoid of merit is accordingly dismissed.
