J U D G M E N T

1. The present appeal has been filed challenging the judgment dated 22nd September, 2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 2942/2019, thereby dismissing the writ petition filed on behalf of the appellant herein filed against the order dated 24th October, 2018 passed by the Central Information Commission (“CIC”) under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (“RTI Act”).

2. The appellant had filed an application dated 19th July, 2017 under the RTI Act seeking his service record from the respondent/National Book Trust. It is the case of the appellant that the respondent, being the Central Public Information Officer (“CPIO”) knowingly provided incomplete information to the appellant under the RTI Act vide letter dated 4th August, 2017. It is submitted that the respondent has wrongly informed that the appellant is working in the National Book Trust since 15th December, 2008, whereas, he is working in the National Book Trust since 2001.

3. Against the letter dated 4th August, 2017 issued by the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 18th September, 2017. The appeal filed by the appellant before the CIC was also dismissed vide order dated 24th October, 2018, against which a writ petition being W.P.(C) 2942/2019 was filed by the appellant. Upon dismissal of the said writ petition by the learned Single Judge vide the impugned order dated 22nd September, 2023, the present appeal has been filed.

4. On behalf of the appellant, it is contended that the CPIO has knowingly given incorrect and incomplete information to the appellant. It is submitted that the Right to Information is incorporated as a fundamental right under Article 19(1) of the Constitution of India and therefore, no other alternative remedy is available to the appellant for enforcement of his fundamental rights. It is pointed out that as per Section 23 of the RTI Act, no Court shall entertain any suit, application or other proceeding in respect of any order made under this Act.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the record, this Court notes that the appellant vide his RTI application dated 19th July, 2017 sought information on eight points in respect of National Book Trust, India; the date since he was employed with the National Book Trust; copy of registration of four agencies as mentioned in the RTI application; whether the post of Artist in the National Book Trust was permanent or contractual; number of staff in the Establishment Department at the time and other issues related thereto.

6. The CPIO, vide his reply dated 4th August, 2017, provided a point-

wise information to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the CPIO’s response, the appellant approached the First Appellate Authority.

7. The First Appellate Authority, vide its order dated 18th September, 2017 upheld the response of the CPIO.

8. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed an appeal before the CIC, which rejected the same by a detailed order dated 24th October, 2018.

9. The main dispute raised by the appellant is that wrong information has been provided to him by the CPIO in response to his RTI application. The learned Single Judge after considering the facts and circumstances of the present case categorically held that the proceedings under the RTI Act cannot be converted into proceedings for adjudication of disputes as to the correctness of the information supplied. Thus, the learned Single Judge held as follows:

“XXX XXX XXX

3. The short question which, therefore, arises for consideration is as to whether the forums under the RTI Act can adjudicate disputes raised by a person seeking information under the RTI Act regarding the correctness of the information supplied ?

4. This issue is no longer res integra and is covered by the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Hansi Rawat & Anr. v. Punjab National Bank & Ors., 2013 SCC OnLine Del 168, wherein this Court has passed the follo