(ii) Issue any other writ or order or direction deems fit
to the facts and circumstances of the present and to
meet the interest of justice."
NC: 2026:KHC:5912
HC-KAR
2. Case of the petitioner is that; he was working as a
Executive Engineer (Civil) at a relevant point of time at Rajaji
Nagar, Division of BBMP, and was also a Public Information
Officer. An application seeking information of the details
required to be prepared and maintained under Section 4(1)(a)
and 4(1)(b) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for brevity
'Act') was made by respondent No.2 on 03.07.2014. That on
receipt of the said application, since information sought was,
with regard to statutory compliance mandated on all the public
authorities under the Act and in the instant case it was the
Commissioner who was required to comply with the
requirement of Section 4 of the Act, petitioner apparently on
04.07.2014 transferred the said application to the respondent
No.3/the Public Information Officer and the Assistant
Commissioner (Admin-1) BBMP for compliance. The action
taken by the petitioner was also communicated to the
respondent No.2.
3. However, respondent No.2 preferred first appeal
before the Chief Engineer of BBMP, West Zone alleging no
compliance by the petitioner. That petitioner on receipt of
NC: 2026:KHC:5912
HC-KAR
notice of the said appeal had appeared and submitted his
defence and also reason for he transferring the application of
respondent No.2. In the meanwhile, on 17.07.2014 the Public
Information Officer/the Assistant Commissioner (Admin-1)
BBMP had already disclosed/furnished the information sought
for by respondent No.2 by way of a compact disc. Not being
satisfied with the same, respondent No.2 preferred a second
appeal before the respondent No.3.
4. That without adverting to the reply issued by the
petitioner and also explanation offered by petitioner in he
transferring the application of respondent No.2 to the Public
Authority, respondent No.1 has passed the impugned order
dated 06.05.2016 imposing penalty of Rs.15,000/- on the
petitioner. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before
this Court.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submitted that the information sought for by the respondent
No.2 apart from being general in nature is also not the one
which is maintained by the petitioner. He submits that the
compliance of the requirement of Section 4 of the Act is an
NC: 2026:KHC:5912
HC-KAR
obligation of the Public Authority over which the petitioner has
no control. He also refers to order dated 1.3.2013 produced at
Annexure-N1 and the order dated 20.06.2013 produced at
Annexure-N2 wherein under similar facts situation of the
matter of an application being made by certain persons therein
seeking information under Section 4(1)(a) and 4(1)(b) of the
Act, the Karnataka Information Commission itself had directed
such request has to be transferred to the Public Officer who is
the Public Authority, has held that the Commissioner, BBMP,
Head Office is the Public Authority, who is expected to provide
the information under Sections 4(1)(a) and 4(1)(b) of the Act.
Thus, he submits that there is inconsistency in the orders
passed by the respondent No.1/Commission. While in the
orders produced at Annexure-N1 and Annexure-N2 under
similar circumstances, it was held that the Commissioner,
BBMP, Head Office was the Public Authority responsible for
maintaining and decimating the information, particularly, to be
maintained under Section 4(1)(a) and Section 4(1)(b) of the
Act, if that logic is applied, the impugned orders now imposing
the responsibility on the petitioner and subjecting him for
NC: 2026:KHC:5912
HC-KAR
payment of penalty is unsustainable. Hence, seeks for allowing
of the petition.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.
1/ Commission on the other hand, referring to Section 6 of the
Act, submits that it was the bounden duty of the petitioner
herein as a Public Information Officer and their assistants to
furnish the information as sought for. Non- compliance of the
same has resulted in the impugned orders.
6. Heard. Perused the records.
7. The information sought for by the respondent No. 2
is in the nature of a query whether or not there was a
compliance to provisions of Sections 4(1)(a) and 4(1)(b) of the
Act and not with regard to any information thereof. Petitioner
under the circumstances has thought it appropriate to forward
the said application to the Commissioner, BBMP. As rightly
pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner, this mode of
action was apparently adopted by the petitioner in view of the
orders dated 01.03.2013 and dated 20.06.2013 produced at
Annexures-N1 and N2 respectively, wherein under similar
NC: 2026:KHC:5912
HC-KAR
circumstances, the State Commission had held Commissioner,
BBMP, Head office is the "Public Authority", who is expected to
prepare the information under Section 4(1)(a) and Section
4(1)(b) of the Act. Therefore, no error can be found with the
action of the petitioner in forwarding the application to the
respondent No.3.
8. That in any event, records reveal that information
as sought for by the respondent No.2 had been furnished by
the Public Information Officer/ Assistant Commissioner, BBMP,
which apparently has not been taken note of by the respondent
No.1 while passing the impugned orders.
9. In that view of the matter, following;
ORDER
i. Writ Petition is disposed of.
ii. Order dated 06.05.2016 produced at Annexure-A and
order dated 04.08.2016 produced at Annexure-B
passed by the respondent No.1/Commissioner are
set aside.
iii. Matter is remitted to the respondent
No.1/Commissioner to re-appreciate the cause shown
NC: 2026:KHC:5912
HC-KAR
by the petitioner, more particularly, taking into
consideration its earlier orders produced at
Annexure- N1 and Annexure- N2 to the writ petition
and pass appropriate orders thereon and also take
into consideration the information already having
been furnished by the respondent No.3 to the
respondent No.2.
iv. The petitioner herein had apparently deposited the
amount pursuant to the interim order dated
29.12.2016. The registry shall release the same to
the petitioner on proper identification.
Sd/-
(M.G.S. KAMAL)
JUDGE
RU
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 7
