Page No.# 1/6 vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 2434 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/6 vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 29 January, 2025

Author: Manish Choudhury

Bench: Manish Choudhury

                                                               Page No.# 1/6

GAHC010265682024




                                                       2025:GAU-AS:1014

                        THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                          Case No. : WP(C)/6687/2024

         KALYAN CHAKRABORTY
         S/O LATE GANGA CHAKRABORTY
         R/O VILL- HERANJHAR
         P.O. MADHAPUR, P.S. BARAMA
         DIST. BAKSA (BTR), ASSAM
         PIN-781346.



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.
         REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
         GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM,
         SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.

         2:THE STATE INFORMATION OFFICER-CUM-DEPUTY DIRECTOR
          ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
         ASSAM
          KAHILIPARA
          GUWAHATI-19

         3:THE SPIO
          DIRECTORATE OF SECONDARY EDUCATION

          ASSAM
          KAHILIPARA
          GUWAHATI-19

         4:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION

          KAHILIPARA
          ASSAM.
                                                                         Page No.# 2/6

            5:THE COMMISSIONER

             STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION
             ASSAM
             JURIPAR
             PANJABARI
             GUWAHATI-37.

            6:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS

             BLOCK DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL

            MUSHALPUR
            DIST. BAKSA (BTR)
            ASSAM

            7:THE HEAD MASTER
             HERAMJAR H.E. SCHOOL

             VILL- HERAMJAR
            P.O. MADHUPUR

            P.S. BARAMA
            DIST. BAKSA (BTR)
            ASSAM
            PIN-78134

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. K K HANDIQUE, MR. K K HANDIQUE,MR. M KALITA

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU., MR D DEKA,MR D DAS,MS H TERANGPI




                                     BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

                                         ORDER

Date : 29-01-2025

Heard Mr. K.K. Handique, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. H. Terangpi, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Elementary Department for the respondent nos. 1 & 3; Ms. S. Konwar, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department for the respondent nos. 2 & 4; Mr. D. Deka, learned Page No.# 3/6

Standing Counsel, Assam Information Commission for the respondent no. 5; and Ms. R.B. Boro, learned Standing Counsel, BTC for the respondent no. 6.

2. In view of the nature of grievance raised in this writ petition and presence of an adequate, efficacious and alternative statutory remedy in the Right to Information Act, 2005, this writ petition is taken up for final consideration at the motion stage itself, as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties.

3. The events which have led the petitioner to prefer this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can be stated, briefly, at first. The petitioner seeking certain information preferred an application under Section 6 of the Right to Information Act ['the RTI Act', for short] before the State Public Information Officer [SPIO], O/o the Director of Elementary Education. The petitioner stated that as the information sought for under Section 6 of the RTI Act was not furnished by the SPIO, he preferred an appeal under Section 19[1]

of the RTI Act before the 1st Appellate Authority, that is, the Director of Elementary Education, Assam. When no information was furnished even after

preferring the 1st appeal, the petitioner had preferred the 2 nd appeal under Section 19[3] of the RTI Act before the Assam Information Commission. On

receipt of the 2nd appeal filed under Section 19[3] of the RTI Act, the Assam Information Commission registered the same as Case no. 398560/[BGS]/9/2023. After issuance of notice, the Assam Information Commission heard the parties

and disposed of the 2nd appeal by an Order dated 20.03.2024 directing the SPIO, O/o the Director of Elementary Education, Assam to furnish complete information pertaining to the application preferred under the RTI Act within 10 [ten] days of receipt of the said Order, free of cost.

Page No.# 4/6

4. The petitioner has stated that despite the Order dated 20.03.2024 and several directions passed thereafter by the Assam Information Commission on 03.04.2024, 05.04.2024, 02.07.2024 & 23.07.2024, the respondent authorities, that is, the SPIO has failed to furnish the information.

5. Mr. Deka, learned Standing Counsel Assam Information Commission has submitted that the petitioner without approaching the Assam Information Commissioner first, has approached this Court by the instant writ petition.

6. This Court in a Judgment and Order dated 12.11.2024 passed in W.P.[C] no. 5132/2024 [Sri Sonadhan Chakma vs. The State of Assam and others], has inter alia observed that the State Information Commission on receipt of a complaint, has the power to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 18 of the RTI Act by taking cognizance of the complaint received from a person, who fulfills the expression, 'any person' occurring therein; and who has already exhausted the remedies under Section 6, Section 19[1] and Section 19[3] of the RTI Act, on its own merits by initiating an inquiry as contemplated under Section 18 if the contents of the complaint falls within any of the categories of sub-section [1] of Section 18 of the RTI Act on reaching a satisfaction that there is reason to inquire into the matter. It has been further observed that the Commission is vested with the powers delineated in sub-sections [3] and [4] of Section 18 of the RTI Act to deal with such a complaint.

7. Section 18 of the RTI Act reads as under :-

18. Powers and functions of Information Commission.-[1] Subject to the provisions of this Act, it Page No.# 5/6

shall be the duty of the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission as the case may be to receive and inquire into a complaint from any person,-

[a] who has been unable to submit a request to a Central Public Information Officer, or State Public Information Officer as the case may be, either by reason that no such officer has been appointed under this Act, or because the Central Assistant Public Information Officer or State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has refused to accept his or her application for information or appeal under this Act for forwarding the same to the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer or Senior Officer specified in sub-section [1] of section 19 or the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be;

[b] who has been refused access to any information requested under this Act; [c] who has not been given a response to a request for information or access to information within the time limits specified under this Act;

[d] who has been required to pay an amount of fee which he or she considers unreasonable; [e] who believes that he or she has been given incomplete, misleading or false information under this Act; and [f] in respect of any other matter relating to requesting or obtaining access to records under this Act.

[2] Where the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to inquire into the matter, it may initiate an inquiry in respect thereof.

[3] The Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be shall, while inquiring into any matter under this section, have the same powers as are vested in a civil court while trying a suit under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, in respect of the following matters, namely:-

[a] summoning and enforcing the attendance of persons and compel them to give oral or written evidence on oath and to produce the documents or things; [b] requiring the discovery and inspection of documents; [c] receiving evidence on affidavit;

[d] requisitioning any public record or copies thereof from any court or office;

Page No.# 6/6

[e] issuing summons for examination of witnesses or documents; and [f] any other matter which may be prescribed.

[4] Notwithstanding anything inconsistent contained in any other Act of Parliament, or the State Legislature, as the case may be, the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may, during the inquiry of any complaint under this Act, examine any record to which this Act applies which is under the control of the public authority, and no such record may be withheld from it on any grounds.

8. Taking into consideration the fact that an Order has already been passed by the State Information Commission, on 20.03.2024, thereby, disposing of the

2nd appeal passing direction to provide the information to the applicant and the direction passed therein has not been complied with, till date, the petitioner would be at liberty to make a complaint to the State Information Commission according to provisions of Section 18 [1] of the RTI Act. If the petitioner makes a complaint before the State Information Commission under the provisions of Section 18 [1] of the RTI Act, the Commission may take cognizance of such complaint on the merits of the complaint. Thus, in the opinion of this Court, the present petition is not to be entertained at this stage in view of the availability of such adequate, efficacious and alternative statutory remedy under Section 18 [1] of the RTI Act and the same is hereby disposed of with an observation that the petitioner would be at liberty to take recourse of law, as provided under the RTI Act.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant