Partly allowed

Pranati Chinhara v. the State of Odisha

Orissa HC21 Sept 2022WP(C)/19370/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court in Public Interest Litigation dismissed a writ petition challenging a State Information Commission order imposing a penalty on the petitioner. The Court directed the Commission to conduct a fresh hearing considering the petitioner's reply submitted on 26.04.2022, before deciding the penalty imposition afresh.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order imposing penalty set aside; matter remitted to State Information Commission to adjudicate imposition of penalty afresh after providing petitioner an opportunity of hearing.

Pranati Chinhara Vs the State of Odisha — RTI and Transparency | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) NO. 19370 OF 2022

¶3

Pranati Chinhara …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Shivsankar Mohanty, Advocate -versus-

¶5

State of Odisha and others

¶6

…. State of Odisha and others Opp. Parties Mr. Swayambhu Mishra, Additional Standing Counsel (Opposite Party No.1) Mr. B.K. Dash, Advocate (For State Information Commissioner)

¶7

CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA ORDER

Order No.

21.09.2022

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶12

The Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order dated 21^st June, 2022 (Annexure-13) passed by the State Information Commission in Second Appeal No. 894 of 2019, wherein a penalty of Rs.25,000/- has been imposed on the Petitioner for willful obstruction of supply of information to the Opposite Party No.6.

¶13

It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that pursuant to the notice to show cause, the Petitioner had submitted her reply on 26^th April, 2022 (Annexure-12), which was received by the Receiving Officer of State Information Commission, Bhubaneswar. But, due to non-appearance of the Petitioner on the date fixed, she could not bring it to the notice of the Commission, for which the impugned order has been passed imposing penalty

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

// 2 //

¶16

on her. He, therefore, prays for a direction to set aside the impugned order imposing penalty on the Petitioner by the Commission and to give her an opportunity of hearing in the matter of imposition of penalty.

¶17

Mr. Dash, learned counsel appearing for the State Information Commission submits that he has no instruction as to whether the Petitioner had, in fact, submitted her reply on 15^th April, 2022. However, it appears from Annexure-12 that there is a seal and signature of receiving Officer of State Information Commission, Bhubaneswar on 26^th April, 2022. If that be so, the Petitioner may be given an opportunity of hearing before imposition of penalty on her.

¶18

Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case of the Petitioner disposes of this writ petition with a direction that the State Information Commission, Bhubaneswar shall give the Petitioner an opportunity of hearing in the matter of imposition of penalty by taking into consideration her explanation stated to have been submitted on 26^th April, 2022. Accordingly, the impugned order under Annexure-13 imposing penalty on the Petitioner is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the State Information Commission, Bhubaneswar to adjudicate the matter of imposition of penalty afresh. In the event the Petitioner appears before the State Information Commission on 10^th October, 2022 along with certified copy of this order, she shall be given an opportunity of hearing in the matter of

Page 2 of 3

// 3 //

bks

imposition of penalty on consideration of her explanation/reply stated to have been submitted on 26^th April, 2022.

¶23

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶24

Page 3 of 3

Pranati Chinhara v. the State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pranati Chinhara v. the State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sushanta Kumar Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Bibekananda Guru Vs Dhirendra Kumar Panda

Bijaya Swain Vs State of Odisha

Sashiprava Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Haladhar Das Mohapatra Vs Duryodhan Sahoo

Haladhar Das Mohapatra Vs Shradhamani Panda