Back
2015 Supreme(Tri) 99
THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
DEEPAK GUPTA and S. TALAPATRA, JJ.
Smt. Supriya Das - Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Tripura and others - Respondents
W.P. (C) 42 of 2015
Decided On : 09.03.2015
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. K. Nath, Advocate., Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, Advocate.
For the respondent-State: Mr. T. Datta Majumder, GA.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of transparency, accountability, and procedural compliance in providing information under the RTI Act.
Headnote:
Right to Information Act - Petitioner's request for information under RTI Act, 2005 - Sections 6, 19, 27, and Tripura Right to Information Rules, 2008 - The court discussed the petitioner's request for information under the RTI Act, the rejection of the request by the State Public Information Officer, the appeal process, and the decision of the Tripura Information Commission. The court emphasized the importance of transparency and accountability in public authorities and highlighted the procedural requirements and powers of the State Information Commission under the RTI Act.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner applied for the position of Jr. Physical Instructor and filed an application under Section 6 of the RTI Act to obtain information related to the selection process. The request was rejected, and the petitioner appealed to the First Appellate Authority and the Tripura Information Commission.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the rejection of the petitioner's request for information did not comply with the procedural requirements and emphasized the importance of providing reasons for decisions under the RTI Act. The court also highlighted the duty of the State Commission to pass reasoned orders and the burden on authorities to justify denial of information.
Issues: The issues involved the rejection of the petitioner's request for information, the appeal process, and the decision of the Tripura Information Commission.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the procedural requirements, the duty of the State Commission to pass reasoned orders, and the burden on authorities to justify denial of information under the RTI Act.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the case, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to challenge the selection process in accordance with the law.
Deepak Gupta, J.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for various reliefs, but at this stage, we are only dealing with the issues which relate to the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the RTI Act’).
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner along with many others applied for being appointed as Jr. Physical Instructor on 15th March, 2010. It appears that she was interviewed by the Board, but the result was not declared. Therefore, on 29th November, 2013, the petitioner filed an application under Section 6 of the RTI Act to the State Public Information Officer (hereinafter referred to as ‘the SPIO’) of the Department concerned to supply her with the entire copy of the file. This application was filed on 29th November, 2013. The document asked for was as follows:-
“Photocopy of the entire file in connection with selection a appointment of Junior Physical Instructor in the Deptt of YA & Sports.”
3. On 10th December, 2013, the SPIO communicated the following order to the petitioner:-
“No.F. 4(43)-DYAS/2005/10,395 Government of Tripura Directorate of Youth Affairs &Sports Agartala
Dated, Agartala, the 10/12/2013
To
Smt. Supriya Das,
D/O Sri Chandramani Das
Vill – Uttar Ramnagar, PO – Airport
Subject:- Seeking information under R.T.I. Act of 2005.
Sir,
In reference to your application dated 29/11/2013, on the subject cited above, I am to inform you that as per provision of RTI-2005, it does not cover for supplying the information/materials because the issue is under process.
This is for your information please.
Yours faithfully
S/d illegible
(Alok Mukherjee)
S.P.I.O.
Deputy Director
Directorate of Youth Affairs & Sports
Tripura”
4. The only ground for rejection was that since the issue is under process, the petitioner is not entitled to the information claimed. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority under the provisions of the RTI Act and again claimed that she be given the copy of the entire file. Various grounds were raised as enumerated in the grounds and there are as many as 15 grounds raised in the petition. The First Appellate Authority gave various dates and finally rejected the appeal vide order dated 27.05.2014, which has been annexed with the petition. The relevant portion of the order reads as follows:-
“On cross – checking of facts & related files, it is noticed that Appointment of Junior Physical Instructors in this Department has yet not been completed as on date. “Appointment of Junior Physical Instructors started from the decision-making, obtaining of approval from various Authorities as per rules etc. and it may complete when “issue of offer of appointment, posting of Jr. P.I’s and acceptance of the joining of the offerees are completed”.
As on date above, process has not been completed and it is still in progress. Hence, the reply issued by the SPIO dated 10.12.2013 does not attract any intervention by this end. Undersigned also refrained from issuing in-complete information, which will not serve the purpose of the applicant in response to the instant appeal.”
5. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner approached the Tripura Information Commission and she has received the following communication from the Tripura Information Commission:-
“No.F.4(2)/TIC/2014/946
October 16, 2014
To
Smti Supriya Das
D/O Sri Chandramani Das
P.O. – Airport, P.S. – Airport
Agartala, West Tripura District
PIN – 799009
Subject:- Representation dated 27.08.2014
Sir,
I am directed to refer to your application dated 29.11.2013 seeking some items of information under the RTI Act from the State Public Information Officer (SPIO), office of the Directorate of Youth Affairs & Sports, Government of Tripura, Agartala as also the appeal petition dated 15.01.2014 and the order of the First Appellate authority (FAA), office of the Directorate of Youth Affairs & Sports, Government of Tripura, Agartala.
2. Your appli
