State of Karnataka Represented by Vs the State Chief Information Commissioner

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER/ ADDL COMMISSIONER FOR TRANSPORT (ADMIN), TC OFFICE, 1^ST FLOOR, TTMC BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 027.

¶10

FIRST APPELLATE AUTHROITY/ COMMISSIONER FOR TRANSPORT TC OFFICE, 1^ST FLOOR, TTMC BUILDING, BENGALURU

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA, AGA)

¶13

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER KARNATAKA STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, (SECOND APPELLATE AUTHORITY,) GATE NO 2, 2^ND FLOOR, M S BUILDING, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶16

SMT BASAVANTHAMMA W/O SHARANAPPA G H, WARD NO 5, SANGANAKALLU, BALLARI TALUK, BALLARI - 583 101.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:3153 WP No. 15398 of 2023

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR K., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. NIKHIL J., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. NAYEEM PASHA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS. QUASH THE ORDER DATED 03.03.2023 (ANNEXURE-C) PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSION IN NO.KIC/12572/APL/2017 AND KIC 12573/APL/2017. CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE CASE NO.KIC/12572/APL/2017 AND KIC 12573/APL/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSION, BENGALURU.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

This petition is by the State, represented by Public Information Officer and the first appellate authority against the order/direction dated 03.03.2023 passed by the Karnataka Information Commission in case No.KIC/12572/APL/2017 and KIC/12573/APL/2017. Respondent No.2Basavanthamma claiming to be wife of one Sharanappa G.H., who was working as Transport Officer/Motor Vehicle Inspector in Transport department of the respondent-State, had filed applications dated 26.02.2016 under Section 6(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 seeking following information,

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:3153 WP No. 15398 of 2023

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

" complete details of service records (SR copies) of

¶31

G.H.Sharanappa, Senior IMV from joining date to till his retirement as well as complete details of assets and liabilities of G.H.Sharanappa, Senior IMV from joining date to till his retirement and also G.H.Sharanappa taking any permission for purchasing assets and liabilities from the department during his service" .

¶32

The application seeking aforesaid information was declined by the Public Information Officer on the premise that the same was exempted under the provisions of Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act. Being aggrieved by the said order, respondent No.2-Basavanthamma preferred an appeal before the Karnataka Information Commission, which by order dated 03.03.2023 while partly allowing the appeals directed the Public Information Officer to provide the documents which are 20 years old as on the date of request and to submit the detailed compliance report by the next date of hearing. It is submitted that the said appeals has now been disposed of by the appellate authority vide order dated 02.12.2025. Though in

¶33

4 -

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:3153 WP No. 15398 of 2023

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

the light of disposal of the aforesaid appeals filed by respondent No.2 nothing survives for consideration in this petition, it is necessary to note that the information as sought for in the first application produced at Annexure-B are general and omnibus in nature, wherein the respondent No.2 claiming to be the wife of said G.H.Sharanappa has sought for complete details of the service records.

¶37

On a query by this Court learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 submits that such information is required for the purpose of her claim for maintenance which she has initiated against the said G.H.Sharanappa before the Family Court. Similar is the answer in respect of the information sought with regard to the details of assets and liabilities.

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 however submit that a fresh application be made seeking specific information with regard to the salary details and also marital status as furnished in the service records and liberty be reserved in this regard.

¶39

Submission taken on record.

¶40

5 -

¶41

NC: 2026:KHC:3153 WP No. 15398 of 2023

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

As regards the second information with regard to assets and liabilities, learned AGA submits that there is no provision requiring an employee of this nature to furnish details of his assets and liabilities. In the absence of requirements of furnishings any such information, authorities cannot be compelled to give information of non-existing facts. She further submits that in any event, since the respondent No.2 is seeking information regarding assets and liabilities, in the light of Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh Vs Neha

¶44

and others reported in (2021)2 SCC 324 respondent No.2 can seek furnishing of such information by way of an affidavit in the proceedings initiated.

¶45

Since nothing further survives for consideration in this petition, reserving liberty to the respondent No.2 seek information specifically with regard to the salary details as noted above, petition is disposed of .

¶46

SD/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

¶47

SBN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32

State of Karnataka Represented by v. the State Chief Information Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Karnataka Represented by v. the State Chief Information Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Registrar (Judicial) Vs Karnataka Information Commission

M/S Tungabhadra Pulp & Board Mills Ltd. Vs State Bank of India

Sri B R Darshan Vs State of Karnataka

Sri M a Amrutharaju Vs State of Karnataka

Nagesh Tantri Vs Commissioner for Hindu Religions and Charitable Endowments

Sri.N.Yogesh Vs State of Karnataka