IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI WEDNESDAY, THE 22^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 26475 OF 2023 PETITIONER:

JOHN SAM AGED 49 YEARS JOHN SAM, GEORGE BHAVAN,ANANDAPPALLY P.O, ADOOR, PIN-

691525 FORMER S.P.I.O, TALUK OFFICE, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT NOW WORKING AS TAHSILDAR,ADOOR., PIN - 691525 BY ADVS.

M.B.SANDEEP K.P.SREEJA ANAGH RAJ RESPONDENTS:

1 THE STATE INFORMATION COMMISIONER THE STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, PUNNAN ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALAM, PIN-695001 REP BY COMMISIONER MR. ABDUL HAKKIM, PIN - 695001

2 STATE OF KERALA STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-

695001 THROUGH GOVERNMENT PLEADER, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV M.AJAY OTHER PRESENT:

SRI. M. AJAY SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

22.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

(Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2023)

This writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

i. “To set aside Exhibit P12 order (order of the State Information Commission dated 22.05.2023).

ii. To direct the concerned officer to return the amount which the petitioner has remitted as fine.”

2. The petitioner is a government servant for the last 26 years in the Department of Revenue. Now he is working as Tahsildar, Adoor, Pathanamthitta District. When the petitioner was working as S.P.I.O, Adoor on 11.10.2020, he received an application on 18.11.2020 filed under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short ‘the RTI Act, 2005’) from one Mr. Mangattu Rajendran. On 15.12.2020 the petitioner gave a reply to the above application. Dissatisfied with the reply, Mr. Mangattu Rajendran filed an appeal before the appellate authority on 15.01.2021 and the appellate authority directed the SPIO to collect the information with respect to question Nos. 1,2,3 &4 from Pandalam village officer and intimate to the applicant. The petitioner has complied the order and on 25.02.2021 sent a letter to the village officer, Pandalam to provide the requested details. It is submitted that the petitioner received the information from village officer, Pandalam, on 01.03.2021. Thereafter, Sri. Mangattu Rajendran approached the State Information Commission on 12.01.2021 challenging Ext.P2 reply. The State Information Commission, in its order dated 27.11.2022 found that the SPIO had made a mistake by returning the application with a reply to approach the concerned village officer. Instead, as per 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005, he was bound to refer the application to the concerned village officer and intimate the matter to the applicant. The commission has pronounced its final order dated 22.05.2023 directing the petitioner to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- as per Section 20(1) of the RTI Act, 2005. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed a review petition before the State Information Officer. Even without considering the same, the 1st respondent has directed the petitioner to pay the fine otherwise the petitioner will have to suffer the consequences. Aggrieved by the order of the 1st respondent, this writ petition is filed.

3. Heard both sides.

4. This Court in Joseph P.J. V. Kerala State Information Commission and anotehr (2020 KHC 4128), held that Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005 should be construed strictly and penalty should be imposed only on finding the Public Information Officer is guilty of the conduct mentioned in the said section. Ext. P12 order does not show any of the finding of eventuality stated in Section 20 of the RTI Act. Therefore, Ext.P12 is quashed and it has to be reconsidered. The petitioner is given an opportunity to file additional explanation to Ext.P10 and the same shall be considered as one with Ext.P11 and pass appropriate orders.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE SRJ APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26475/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION