Back
RAJESH SHANKAR
Ravindra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 24.02.2020 as contained in memo no. 3218 dated 02.03.2020 (Annexure-16 to the writ petition) passed by the Acting Chief Information Commissioner, Jharkhand, Ranchi (the respondent no. 2) in Appeal Case No. 2170 of 2012, whereby the said respondent recommended for initiation of departmental/disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner under Section 20(2) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 2005”).
2. Reference is made to order dated 11.06.2024, which reads as under:
2. The service of notice upon the said respondent is thus complete.
3. No one appears on behalf of respondent no. 3.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as respondent no. 2 for a while.
5. Before proceeding further in the matter, the petitioner is directed to file supplementary affidavit within one week disclosing his places of posting and the period thereof with effect from 22nd May, 2012, i.e. the date of a
The court ruled that a Public Information Officer cannot be held accountable for failing to provide information if they were not in the relevant position at the time of the request.
Public Information Officers can only be penalized under RTI for failures occurring during their tenure when a request was made, not retroactively for former officers' actions.
The main legal point established is that under the Right to Information Act, 2005, a Public Information Officer is not liable for delay in providing information if it is supplied within the required ....
Imposing a penalty under RTI Act, 2005 requires the Public Information Officer to be given a chance to be heard, and liability under Section 20 cannot apply retroactively to an officer who was not in....
Officers can only be penalized for information delays if they were in charge at the time of the request; newly appointed officers are not liable for prior delays.
The court established that the provisions of Section 20 of the Act, 2005 should be strictly construed, and the Commissioner must ensure that the conduct of the Information Officer was not bona fide b....
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
