Mahipal vs State Information Commission Haryana ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 5635 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Mahipal vs State Information Commission Haryana ... on 13 March, 2024

Author: Vikas Bahl

Bench: Vikas Bahl

                                                     Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035731




CWP-5816-2024                       [1]                       2024:PHHC:035731



104
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

                                                 CWP-5816-2024
                                                 Date of decision: 13.03.2024

Mahipal

                                                                         ...Petitioner

                                        Versus

State Information Commission, Haryana and others

                                                                     ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL

Present:     Mr. Ketan Antil, Advocate for the petitioner.

             Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

             ****

VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)

1. This is a Civil Writ Petition filed under Article 226/227 of the

Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for

setting aside the impugned order dated 14.07.2022 (Annexure P-5) and

order dated 15.11.2023 (Annexure P-6) passed by respondent No.1.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

petitioner had moved an application under the Right to Information Act,

2005 (hereinafter to be referred as "the RTI Act") and had sought

information on 27 points. It is further submitted that when the requisite

information was not provided, the petitioner filed a complaint which was

converted into an appeal under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act by the State

Information Commissioner and that the State Information Commissioner

1 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035731

CWP-5816-2024 [2] 2024:PHHC:035731

did not proceed in the matter in accordance with law and adjudicated the

matter in an omnibus manner and disposed of the appeal on 14.07.2022. It is

submitted that the order dated 14.07.2022 is contrary to the law laid down

by this Court in CWP-17672-2023 titled as Rajwinder Singh Vs. State of

Punjab and others decided on 16.08.2023. It is also submitted that although

the subsequent order dated 15.11.2023 is partly in favour of the petitioner

but since, the desired RTI information has not been provided thus, he would

pray that subsequent order dated 15.11.2023 be also set aside.

3. Learned State Counsel has submitted that in case the matter is

remanded back then respondent No.1 would decide the matter in accordance

with law laid down by this Court in Rajwinder Singh's case (Supra).

4. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and has

perused the record.

5. In Rajwinder Singh's case (Supra), this Court after considering

various judgments had observed as under:-

"12. This Court has found that in a large number of cases, the authorities including the first Appellate Authority {(while adjudicating the first statutory appeal under Section 19(1)} and the second Appellate Authority {(while adjudicating the second statutory appeal under Section 19(3)} under the Act, have been passing cryptic and non-speaking orders in violation of the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various High Courts and also in violation of the mandate of the Act of 2005. It is, thus, found necessary to give the following directions to the first Appellate Authority and second Appellate Authority under the Act of 2005 to clearly specify the following at the time of finally adjudicating the case:-

2 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035731

CWP-5816-2024 [3] 2024:PHHC:035731

i) The points on which the information is sought by the applicant as per his/her application filed under the Act of 2005.

ii) The point-wise reply with respect to the information sought.

iii) A categorical finding as to whether the information on any of the points has been supplied or not and if supplied, the date on which it has been supplied.

iv) In case, it is the stand of the authorities from whom the information is sought that the information sought under a particular point is not to be supplied on account of any bar contained in any provisions of the Act of 2005 or for any other reason, then, after recording the said stand and after considering the submissions made by both the parties with respect to said point/issue, return a finding with respect to the said issue/point.

v) Any other observation which the authority deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case to be recorded.

13. The Chief Secretary to the States of Punjab & Haryana and the Advisor to the Administrator, Chandigarh are directed to circulate the judgment passed in the present case i.e. CWP-17672-2023 titled as "Rajwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others" and the judgment dated 13.07.2023 passed in CWP-1877-2022 titled as "Gagnish Singh Khurana Vs. State of Punjab and others" as well as the judgment dated 21.07.2023 passed in CWP-15500-2023 titled as "Gopal Krishan Gupta Vs. Central Information Commission and others", to all the authorities constituted under the Act for complying with the same.

16.08.2023"

6. In the present case, a perusal of application filed under the RTI

Act would show that the information on 27 points had been sought by the

3 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035731

CWP-5816-2024 [4] 2024:PHHC:035731

petitioner whereas in the impugned order dated 14.07.2022 although it has

been noticed that the complaint under Section 18(2) of the RTI Act filed by

the petitioner was converted into an appeal under Section 19(3) of the RTI

Act but it is not stated anywhere whether the SPIO was served or not.

Moreover, from the said order, it is also not clear as to what efforts were

made to serve the SPIO. Neither, the points under which the RTI

information was sought have been enumerated nor any finding has been

given as to whether the petitioner was entitled to information under the said

points or not. Omnibus observations/directions have been given directing

the respondents to provide complete information and in case the petitioner

is not satisfied with the furnished information, he would be at liberty to file

a rejoinder. Such an order is not sustainable as even in case a person has

been proceeded against ex parte, an affirmative finding with respect to

every aspect is required to be given so that the appeal is effectively decided

rather than requiring the parties to file subsequent rejoinders/applications

under Section 20 of the RTI Act. Even a perusal of Section 20(1) of the RTI

Act would make it clear that the State Information Commission, at the time

of deciding the complaint/appeal, in case the conditions in the said Sub

Section are met, are required to impose a penalty etc. and the same should

not be left for a subsequent stage. The order dated 14.07.2022 is thus,

against law and against the judgment passed by this Court in Rajwinder

Singh's case (Supra) and since the order dated 14.07.2022 is held to be

against law thus, the subsequent order dated 15.11.2023 would also be

required to be set aside.

7. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances, the

4 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035731

CWP-5816-2024 [5] 2024:PHHC:035731

present Civil Writ Petition is partly allowed and orders dated 14.07.2022 as

well as 15.11.2023 are set aside and the State Information Commissioner,

Haryana is directed to re-decide the complaint filed by the petitioner under

Section 18(2) of the RTI Act which has been converted into an appeal under

Section 19(3) of the RTI Act in accordance with law laid down by this

Court in Rajwinder Singh's case (Supra) as expeditiously as possible

preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified

copy of the present order.

13.03.2024                                            (VIKAS BAHL)
Pawan                                                    JUDGE


             Whether speaking/reasoned:-              Yes/No

             Whether reportable:-                     Yes/No




                                                    Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035731

                                5 of 5