Partly allowed

Jubat Kumar Kalita v. the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Gauhati HC17 Dec 2019WP(C)/2252/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition concerning the RTI Act, the Gauhati High Court disposed of the petition after counsel agreed to redirect the applicant. The petitioner was directed to file a fresh application before the Director of Secondary Education Assam, who must pass a reasoned order within 15 days. The petition stands partly allowed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file fresh RTI application with Director of Secondary Education Assam; Director to pass reasoned order within 15 days.

Jubat Kumar Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors. — RTI and Transparency | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010009022014

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 2252/2014

¶5

1:JUBAT KUMAR KALITA

¶6

S/O- LT. CHANDRA KANTA KALITA, WARD NO. 10, DHING TOWN, HOUSE NO. - 100, P.O.- NIZ-DHING, P.S.- DHING, DIST.- NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN782123.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS

¶9

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY- 6.

¶10

2:THE MEMBER SECRETARY EMPOWERED COMMITTEE FOR TET FOR HIGHER SECONDARY ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY- 19.

¶11

3:THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE MISSION DIRECTOR RMSA ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY- 19

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. C BARUAH

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. S P BHATTACHARJEE (SC, SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPTT.)

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

¶16

Date : 17-12-2019

¶17

JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

¶18

Heard Mr. RK Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. SP Bhattacharjee, learned standing counsel for the respondents in the Secondary Education Department, Government of Assam.

¶19

Pursuant to the advertisement No.RMSA/AD/HS TET/130/2013/9 dated 21.12.2013 of the Member Secretary, Empowered Committee for TET for Higher Secondary Education, relating to conducting of TET, the petitioner duly applied and participated in the examination. After the results of the examination were declared, the petitioner made an application under the Right to Information Act dated 24.02.2014 asking for certain information as regards her participation in the TET examination. The RTI application is available at page 16 as Annexure-6 to the writ petition and the information sought was for copies of the question booklet along with the answer scripts of Paper-I and Paper-II.

¶20

The respondents through the PIO, RMSA, Assam gave a reply dated 13.03.2014 stating as under:

¶21

“With reference to your application quoted above, I am directed to communicate that your petition under RTI Act-2005 is not specified. In relation to the same you are requested to mention the Question Booklet code for both Paper I & Paper II for further necessary action.”

¶22

Prima facie, the reply appears to be evasive and does not meet the requirement under the RTI Act of 2005.

¶23

Mr. SP Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the Secondary Education Department states that the appropriate authority for providing such information would be the Director of Secondary Education Assam and not the Mission Director, RMSA, Assam before whom the application was made.

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

In the resultant circumstance, it is agreed upon by both Mr. RK Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. SP Bhattacharjee, learned standing counsel for the Secondary Education Department that the petitioner may file a fresh application before the Director of Secondary Education Assam for the required information and upon the same being filed, the Director would give a due consideration to it under the law.

¶26

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by requiring the petitioner to file a fresh application under the Right to Information Act before the Director of Secondary Education Assam and upon the application being filed, the Director of Secondary Education Assam shall give a due consideration and pass a reasoned order thereon within a period of 15(fifteen) days from the date of receipt of the application.

¶27

In terms of the above, this writ petition stands partly allowed.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Jubat Kumar Kalita v. the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jubat Kumar Kalita v. the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Babita Singha Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Smt. Uma Das Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Md. Jakir Hussain and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Himan Kumar Nath Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Smti. Nayanmoni Hazarika and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Dilip Kumar Nath and 7 Ors. Vs Mohan Chandra Boro and Anr.