Judgment

Mr. Vikas Bahl, J.

Prayer in the present Civil Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 20.07.2021 (Annexure P-6) passed by respondent No.4-Punjab State Information Commission, Chandigarh, vide which the second appeal preferred by the petitioner has been disposed of and closed. Further prayer for quashing the order dated 04.10.2021 (Annexure P-9) passed by respondent No.4-Punjab State Information Commission, Chandigarh has also been made.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had submitted an application dated 11.11.2019 to respondent No.2, seeking the following information:-

“(i) Kindly provide the certified copy of Brochure released by PSIEC before the allotment of Phase VIII, Focal Point, Ludhiana.

(ii) Kindly provide the minutes of meeting of PSIEC on which these amenities were added in the advertisement plan before the allotment.

(iii) Kindly provide the certified information on the map where the space for the amenities mentioned in brochure was space was marked. Kindly support your answer by providing the copy of Map.

(iv) Kindly provide the certified copy of the Budget expenditure out of the total budget which was earmarked for the provision of amenities mentioned in brochure. Support your answer with total budget papers.

(v) Kindly provide the details of all expenditure done by PSIEC in lieu of the amenities mentioned in aforesaid brochure. Support your answer with certified copy of account statements, vouchers etc.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that in terms of Section 7 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter to be referred as “the Act of 2005”), it was the obligation of the Public Information Officer to have supplied the requisite information within a period of 30 days but however, respondent No.2 did not supply the requisite information to the petitioner for a considerable amount of time which even went beyond 30 days and thus, the petitioner filed first appeal under Section 19 (1) of the Act of 2005. It is contended that since, even thereafter the requisite information was not supplied, the petitioner, after waiting for a period of 52 days, preferred the second appeal before respondent No.4 under Section 19 (3) of the Act of 2005 read with Punjab State Right to Information Rules, 2017 and has referred to the copy of the said second appeal which is annexed as Annexure P-3 with the writ petition to highlight the fact that several prayers were made in the said second appeal. It is argued that as per the provisions of Section 20 of the Act of 2005, in case, the State Information Commission is of the opinion that at the time of deciding any complaint/appeal, the State Public Information Officer has, without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for information or has not furnished the same within the specified time or malafidely denied the same or had destroyed the information then, the State Information Commission would impose a penalty as stipulated in the said Section and also take appropriate action. It is further argued that on 27.05.2021, respondent No.4-Commission took cognizance of an affidavit dated 26.05.2021 filed by respondent No.2 which stated that the record demanded by the petitioner from the Punjab Small Industries and Export Corporation (PSIEC) was not traceable/available in the office record and thereafter, vide the impugned order dated 20.07.2021, the State Information Commission, by passing a cryptic and non-speaking order, merely on the basis of the said affidavit, disposed of and closed the statutory appeal of the petitioner. The same was done in spite of the fact that it was specifically recorded that the petitioner was not satisfied with the information provided and without dealing with the submissions of the petitioner. It is argued that respondent No.4 had, believed the contents of the af