In an RTI contempt application, the court held that the State Information Commission complied with the order by dismissing the appeal, rendering the petition groundless. The rule is discharged and the application disposed of without keeping it pending.
Rule is discharged. WPCRC 141 of 2019 is disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
sl
15,16 12-04-2021 Court No. 6 ssi/sb
WPCRC 141 of 2019 With WPA 27355 of 2012
Dr. Nazrul Islam, IPS (Retd.) -VsMalay Kr. De & Ors.
Mr. Golam Mostafa
……for the petitioner Mr. Raja Saha Mrs. Arpita Saha Mr. Sanjay Mukherjee …for the alleged contemnor
The order, violation whereof is alleged in this contempt application, has two parts. The first part regarding payment of compensation has been complied with and there is no dispute in that regard. The petitioner says that the second part of the order whereby the State Information Commission was directed to dispose of the petitioner’s Second Appeal pending before it, has not been complied with.
Learned advocate for the alleged contemnors points out with reference to a document at page 61 of the contempt petition that the State Chief Information Commissioner, West Bengal, disposed of the concerned appeal on December 14, 2016.
Learned advocate for the petitioner says that the appeal may have been disposed of but the relevant information has not yet been supplied to the petitioner.
2
The direction was on the Authority concerned to dispose of the petitioner’s appeal. That has been done. If the petitioner is still aggrieved, for whatever reason, the petitioner will be at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law before the appropriate forum. Since the order in question has been complied with, I see no reason to keep the contempt petition pending.
Rule is discharged.
WPCRC 141 of 2019 is disposed of.
(Arijit Banerjee, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the State Information Commission complied with the direction to dispose of the Second Appeal.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to continue the contempt petition due to alleged non-supply of information.
Dr. Nazrul Islam, IPS (Retd.)
Malay Kr. De & Ors.
Arijit Banerjee
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
