Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RAJESH SHANKAR
Shrawan Kumar, son of Late Rajendra Ravidas – Appellant
Versus
State Chief Information Commissioner, Ranchi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 26.02.2015 (Annexure-11 to the writ petition) passed by the Acting Chief Information Commissioner, Ranchi (the respondent no. 1) in second appeal being Appeal no. 2860 of 2011 preferred by the respondent no. 2 which was communicated to the petitioner vide memo no. 4559 dated 14.05.2015 issued under the signature of Under Secretary, Jharkhand State Information Commission, Ranchi, whereby penalty of Rs.25,000/- has been imposed upon him under Section 20 (1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (in short, “the Act, 2005”) to be deducted from his salary in five equal monthly instalments w.e.f. March, 2015.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Sanjeev Kumar Khandelwal (the respondent no. 2) had sought certain information from the Public Information Officer-cum-Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Giridih vide his application dated 04.08.2011 which was not provided to him within statutory period for which he preferred first appeal before the Deputy Commissioner-cum-First Appellate Authority, Giridih vide his application dated 10.09.2011. Thereafter, the required information not
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.
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....
Public Information Officer is not liable for delays not caused during their tenure; penalties require evidence of wrongdoing and loss to justify compensation under the Right to Information Act.
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....
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 ....
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
