IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA nd ON THE 2 OF MAY, 2023 WRIT PETITION No. 3166 of 2023 BETWEEN:-

RAKESH S/O LATE SHRI LAKHAN SINGH YADAV, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O 392/2 HUKUMCHAND COLONY, DISTRICT INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (SHRI AKASH SHARMA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER.)

AND KRISHNAPAL SINGH KUSHWAHA ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ADDRESS: ASSISTANT ENGINEER

1.

OFFICE, SANGAM NAGAR, ZONE DISTRICT INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, ADDRESS: 35/B, 2.

SUCHNA BHAWAN, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MADHYA PRADESH PASHCHIM KSHETRA VIDYUT VITRAM CO. LTD., ADDRESS: MANAGING

3.

DIRECTOR, MADHYA PRADESH PASCHIM KSHETRA VIDYUT VITRAM CO. LTD., INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER MADHYA PRADESH PASHCHIM KSHETRA VIDYUT VITRAM CO. LTD., ADDRESS: MANAGING

4.

DIRECTOR ENGINEER, MADHYA PRADESH PASHCHIM KSHETRA VIDYUT VITRAM CO.

LTD., INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

Signature Not Verified Signed by: DIVYANSH .....RESPONDENTS (SHRI SHASHWAT SETH, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.2.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This petition coming on for orders this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

Petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 17.10.2022 whereby the State Information Commission has dismissed the appeal as the petitioner had already received the desired document under Right to Information Act, 2005.

Facts of the case in short are as under:

[1] The petitioner submitted an application under Section 6(1) of RTI Act, 2005 seeking disability certificate of respondent No.1 who is working as Assistant Engineer in Paschim Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Co. Ltd., Indore. The petitioner is a registered contractor of the Electricity company.

[2] According to the petitioner, the respondent No.1 secured the employment under the physical disabled quota whereas he does not suffer any disablement, therefore, he sought the disability certificate under the RTI. Earlier, the petitioner approached to the State Commission in the year 2017, vide order dated 06.08.2019 an appeal was allowed by directing Public Information Officer to supply him an information on point No.2, 3 and 4 i.e. educational certificate, disability certificate, caste certificate and domicile certificate within 15 days.

[3] The petitioner again submitted an application under Section Signature Not Verified Signed by: DIVYANSH

6(1) on 16.06.2021 to the Public Information Officer that as per the Rule, every 5 years’ the disabled person is liable to submit afresh disability certificate, therefore, afresh certificate submitted by respondent No.1 after 2014 be supplied to him, the said application was rejected by Public Information Officer vide order dated 12.07.2021 that under Section 8(1)(j) and 11 of RTI Act, 2005 such an information cannot be supplied against the said order. An appeal was preferred before the First Appellate Authority that was also dismissed vide order dated 29.11.2021 thereafter, the petitioner preferred a second appeal before Commission which came to be dismissed vide order dated

17.10.2022 hence, this petition before this Court.

[4] Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the information sought by present petitioner ought to have been supplied to the petitioner and the Public Information Officer, Appellate Authority have wrongly dismissed the appeal.

[5] This petitioner is a contractor and respondent No.1 is Assistant Engineer working in the Electricity company, it appears that the petitioner is seeking the information in order to harass him. The disability certificate produced by the respondent No.1 at the time of employment has already been supplied to him. The petitioner has failed to produce any document to show that the disabled person is required to supply certificate every 5 years, all the authorities have rightly held that u