Jump to content
  • 0
nk agarwal

Strange Decision by Uttarakhand Information Commission

Question

nk agarwal

On a complaint under Section 18(1)(e) of the RTI Act-2005 with prayer for imposition of penalty under section 20(1) read with scetion 7(1) and section 20(2) the SIC has given an incongruent decision ignoring basic facts and grounds of the 2nd appeal, Can a review curative appeal be filed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Prasad GLN

A citizen has only the right to seek information alone, the citizen can not question the discretion of IC except by way of writ in High Court. Review is not possible by IC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Sunil Ahya

Information Commissions do not have the power to review its own decisions, it can only correct clerical or arithmetical errors, therefore the only option available is to approach a High Court in WP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
nk agarwal

Could you pl. share the format for filing a Writ in High Court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Prasad GLN

What are your prayers for remedy through writ ?

If it is action against PIO, you may not succeed as per Delhi HC Judgment.

You can search website of your HC, as they might have uploaded such formats in their website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
nk agarwal

I wish to go to High Court against the decision of SIC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Prasad GLN

That is right. But you want information or some other thing as remedy like disciplinary action , Penalty, compensation ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
nk agarwal

The complaint has ben filed under section 18(1)(e) as already mentioned in my 1st post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
smbhappy

It is strange that every one is playing blind here and no one has called for the copy of the order of the commission and comments are being made just on the basis of the statement. Mr. N.K. Aggarwal is requested to post copy of the order here.

 

In the meanwhile members are requested to see the provision of Section 19(9) which provides for an "Additional Appeal". This can be construed as an type of "Review" or "Curative" action to set right the wrong committed, perhaps!!

 

SECTION 19(9)

The Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall give notice

of its decision, including any right of appeal, to the complainant and the public authority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Prasad GLN

Sir,

So far any such precedent by any Information Commission on such reviews, and informing further right to appeal ?

I have seen several posts in this forum wherein CIC has refused to review the decisions quoting Delhi HC Judgment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
nk agarwal

Would appreciate, if the copy of Delhi HC judgement is posted here.

Has the section 19(9) left un-used by appellants/complainants, there seems to be a scope of Appeal on decision?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • p.esakkimuthu
      By p.esakkimuthu
      The RTI Act provides for transfer of information u/s 6(3) if the information is/are held by other PIO/PIOs. I asked 15 infromations from the Ministry of Finance. Out of these 15 informations, 12 informations are to be answered by other ministries.Whether the Ministry of Finance is leagally liable to transfer the 12 informations to other PIOs u/s 6(3) of the RTI Act. The inance Ministry refused to act as persec 6(3) of RTI Act saying that they can not do the Postman work of others.What is the position with regard to this aspect.
    • drgvrao
      By drgvrao
      Dear Friends
       
      My 2nd appeal with the CIC bearing F No. CIC/AT/A/2008/00437 dated 31.10.2008 was disposed off by upholding the decision of the AA in not furnishing information. The decision of the CIC is misplaced and facts have been ignored. I requested for a copy of the preliminary hearing held against me and a copy of file notings leading to my suspension from services. Enquiry was completed way back in July 2007. My application was kept pending 10 months despite reminders. An amount of Rs 100 was collected after revalidation of the Demand Draft. The first appeal was heard on 16.11.2007 and disposed off on 12.03.2008. So many lapses. But the Information commissioner relied on a judgement which is dissimilar to my circumstances viz., V K Gulati vs DG Vig, Customs and Central Excise; CIC/AT/2007/01508 has been relied upon by the Information Commissioner. In V K Gulati's case the disciplinary proceedings were underway, whereas in my case the Disciplinary Authority, on a sworn statement, in the Hon'ble High Court of AP has disclosed that the disciplinary proceedings were completed. So how can the IC depend on dissimilar instances. Further the respondents had filed a written submission to the CIC in reply to my 2nd appeal. Am i not entitled for a copy of the same before the actual hearing held. Therefore under such circumstances I want to appeal against this order. I dont want to go the Judicial Courts since they are time and money consuming. Can anyone of you enlighten me on this. What should i do now.
       
      Dr G V Rao

Announcements



×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy