Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bhiwani Central Coop. Bank Ltd vs St. Information Commission, Hry. Etc on 21 March, 2024
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:041166
CWP-21744-2008 1 2024:PHHC:041166
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
***
CWP-21744-2008
Date of decision : 21.03.2024
The Bhiwani Central Cooperative Bank Limited and others
... Petitioners
Versus
The State Information Commission and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr.Subhash Ahuja, Advocate and
Mr.Karamveer Ahuja, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr.Amandeep Joshi, DAG, Haryana.
VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL)
1. This is a civil writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the
Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari /
mandamus for quashing the impugned order dated 31.07.2008 conveyed
vide letter dated 11.08.2008 (Annexure P-7) whereby the respondent-State
Information Commission has held the petitioner bank to be a Public
Authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
2. In the present case, vide impugned order dated 31.07.2008
conveyed vide letter dated 11.08.2008 (Annexure P-7), the State
Information Commission had held the petitioner bank to be a Public
Authority under the Right to Information Act and accepted the appeal filed
by respondent no.3. On 24.12.2008, the present petition was admitted and
the operation of the impugned order was stayed. Thereafter on 21.03.2012,
the case was listed and the Coordinate Bench of this Court was pleased to
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:041166
CWP-21744-2008 2 2024:PHHC:041166
pass the following order:-
Present:- Mr. Subhash Ahuja, Advocate,
for the non-applicant-petitioner.
Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
Mr.Ashok Kumar Sehrawat, Advocate
for applicant-respondent no.3.
***
Counsel for the non-applicant-petitioner states that the
judgment relied upon by the applicant-respondent for disposal of the writ
petition, has been challenged in an appeal which is pending
consideration. He further states that the operation of the said judgment
has also been stayed and prays for some time to produce the copy of the
order passed in LPA.
List for further consideration on 5.9.2012.
March 21, 2012 (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH)
JUDGE"
A perusal of the same would show that the judgment relied
upon by respondent no.3 for disposing of the case was stated to be
challenged in LPA by the learned counsel for the petitioner with the further
submission that the stay has been granted in the same. On 08.07.2013, the
Coordinate Bench of this Court was pleased to pass the following order:-
"It is not disputed that the matter in issue is pending before a
Division Bench of this Court in LPA No.1191 of 2011, titled as The Zenith
Cooperative House Building Society Limited Ludhiana vs The State
Information Commission, Punjab and others. Counsel for the petitioners
is ad-idem that this matter should be adjourned sine die to await the
decision of the said appeal.
Ordered accordingly.
(AJAY TEWARI)
JUDGE
July 08, 2013."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the said
LPA no.1191 of 2011 has been decided on 12.12.2013 and in the said case,
the following order was passed:-
"For orders, see LPA No.1174 of 2021 (Punjab Cricket
Association vs. State Information Commission, Punjab and another).
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:041166
CWP-21744-2008 3 2024:PHHC:041166
(Ajay Kumar Mittal)
Judge
December 12, 2013 (Jaspal Singh)
Judge"
4. It is submitted that the Division Bench of this Court vide order
dated 12.12.2013 had allowed the LPA-1174-2011 and had passed the
following directions:-
"8. Accordingly, while allowing the appeals, the following directions
are issued:-
i) The orders passed by the State Information Commission (SIC) and the
learned Single Judge in all these appeals are set aside. The matter is
remanded to the SIC to decide the same afresh.
ii) The interim order shall continue till the disposal of the appeals by the
SIC.
iii) All the pleas available to the appellants herein shall be allowed to be
raised before the SIC. The SIC shall decide the matter afresh keeping in
view the judgment of the Apex Court in Thalappalam Ser. Coop Bank
Limited's case (supra) within six months from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of this order.
iv) Each case shall be decided separately by referring to the facts involved
therein.
v) The SIC shall not be influenced by anything which has been observed
herein while deciding the matter afresh.
(Ajay Kumar Mittal)
Judge
December 12, 2013 (Jaspal Singh)
Judge"
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that learned
counsel for respondent no.3 had relied upon the judgment which has been
set aside and the matter has been remanded in the above said terms and thus,
the present impugned order also deserves to be set aside and the matter is to
be remanded in the same terms as the judgments in LPA-1191-2011 and
LPA-1174-2021.
6. None has appeared on behalf of respondent no.3 in spite of the
fact that the Registry has informed respondent no.3 about listing of the
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:041166
CWP-21744-2008 4 2024:PHHC:041166
present case on three different dates including today.
7. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances , the
present writ petition is partly allowed, the impugned order dated
31.07.2008, conveyed vide letter dated 11.08.2008 (Annexure P-7), is set
aside and the matter is remanded to the State Information Commissioner to
decide the same afresh.
8. It would be open to all the parties to raise all pleas available to
them before the State Information Commissioner and the State Information
Commissioner, while deciding the matter afresh, would take into
consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil
Appeal No.9017 of 2013 titled as "Thalappalam Ser.Coop.Bank Limited
and others v. State of Kerala and others" decided on 7.10.2013.
9. It is made clear that this Court has not opined on the merits of
the case and the State Information Commissioner would decide the case
independently, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.
(VIKAS BAHL)
JUDGE
March 21, 2024
Davinder Kumar
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
