Friends,
You might remember that I had told about two Writ Petitions I filed in the Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court. I thought it proper to present the outcome of the two petitions as well.
The Writ Petition No 987 of 2011(M/B) was about the Notesheet of the study leave file of another IPS officer. The Public Information Officer of the Home Department had refused to give the information saying that this was personal information. The UP State Information Commission through its order dated 03/01/2012 had ordered the PIO to provide all other information except the Notesheet of the concerned file calling it personal information. In the Writ Petition I said that the Notesheet of a government file cannot be regarded as personal information and hence shall also be provided.
In the hearing, the Counsel for the Commission informed the High Court that the matter is still under active consideration by the Information Commission where the next date was fixed as 22/02/2012 and hence it was premature to come to High Court. I was hence directed to go to the Commission to present my point of view there itself.
In Writ Petition No 985 of 2011 (M/B), I presented two cases in which the Commission first imposed penalty under section 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act but it later reviewed its order and waived off the penalty. I said that the settled principle of law is that only those authorities can review their order that have been specifically empowered, which isnot empowered under the RTI Act or any other law to review their order.
In Writ Petition No 985 of 2011 (M/B), I presented two cases in which the Commission first imposed penalty under section 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act but it later reviewed its order and waived off the penalty. I said that the settled principle of law is that only those authorities can review their order that have been specifically empowered, which isnot empowered under the RTI Act or any other law to review their order.
My point of view was endorsed by the High Court. I present its order dated 03/02/2012-
"An argument has been advanced by the petitioner in person that the punishment awarded to the respondent no. 3 has been recalled by the process of review. Further submission of the petitioner in person is that the power of review cannot be exercised unless it is conferred by the statute.
Admittedly, under the Rights to Information Act, there is no provision for review. Argument advanced by the petitioner in person has got force and requires consideration.
Let Counter Affidavit be filed within six weeks. Rejoinder Affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter."
I certainly feel quite satisfied with the two orders and hope to get justice very soon.
Admittedly, under the Rights to Information Act, there is no provision for review. Argument advanced by the petitioner in person has got force and requires consideration.
Let Counter Affidavit be filed within six weeks. Rejoinder Affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter."
I certainly feel quite satisfied with the two orders and hope to get justice very soon.
For ur kind perusal and comments please.
Amitabh Thakur
# 94155-34526
# 94155-34526
__._,_.___
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment