Partly allowed

Shashi Bhushan Gupta v. Municipal Corporation Patiala and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Nov 2010CWP/11528/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed an order of the State Information Commission for failing to provide reasons for withholding specific information under the RTI Act, directing the Commission to re-address the issue within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Order of State Information Commission quashed; matter relegated to Commission to assign reasons and act within four weeks.

Shashi Bhushan Gupta Vs Municipal Corporation… — RTI and Transparency | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.11528 of 2009 Date of Decision: November 09, 2010

Shashi Bhushan Gupta

.....PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

Municipal Corporation, Patiala & others

.....RESPONDENT(S)

. . .

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

¶11

PRESENT: - Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Vinish Singla, Advocate, for respondent Nos.1 and 3.

¶12

Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent No.2.

¶13

. . .

¶14

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)

¶15

This writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to decide representations dated 22.11.2008 (Annexure P-2) and 5.12.2008 (Annexure P-3) filed by the petitioner in pursuance of order dated 4.9.2008, Annexure P-1.

¶16

Order, Annexure P-1, was passed by

¶17

CWP No.11528 of 2009 [2]

¶18

Division Bench of this Court while dealing with Civil Writ Petition No.2605 of 2008 titled ‘ Leela Bhawan Market Welfare Society & others vs. State of Punjab & others ’. While dealing with the said petition, this Court allowed the petitioners to make representation to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Patiala. Municipal Corporation, Patiala was required to initiate appropriate action, if any called for under the provisions of the relevant laws.

¶19

During the pendency of the writ petition, decision on the representation(s) has been taken which has been placed on record as Annexure R-1/3.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that he would take recourse to legal remedy as permissible in law against Order, Annexure R-1/3.

¶21

Challenge in this petition is also to Order, Annexure P-5, passed by the State Information Commission, Punjab. It transpires that the petitioner filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short, referred to as, ‘RTI Act’) to seek information on 12 issues. Order dated 21.11.2008 (Annexure P-5) reads as under:-

¶22

“The APIO submits a legible reply dated 24.10.2008 which is taken on record. He is directed to give point-wise information/documents as and if these

¶23

CWP No.11528 of 2009 [3]

¶24

exists on record, duly attested, to the complainant on all the 12-points that he has raised in this RTI application dated 14.1.2008. However, no information is to be provided on point no. 02. “copy of building plan as sanctioned by Municipal Corporation with respect to building on plot no. 28 & 29. Ajit Nagar, Pataila.”

¶25

I direct the respondent to give the requisite information to the complainant not later than 15.12.2008 with a compliance report to the commission.”

¶26

I find that the State Information

¶27

Commissioner has not given any reason as to why and under what circumstances information cannot be provided on “Point No.02”. Under the RTI Act, a Public Authority is obliged to give information (as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act). Likewise, a person has a right to information as defined under Section 2(j) of the RTI Act.

¶28

The matter is relegated to State Information Commission, Punjab, to re-address the issue and assign reasons for not issuing direction to give information on Point No.02. Needful be done within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.

¶29

The petition is disposed of with above directions.

¶30

(AJAI LAMBA)

¶31

November 09, 2010 JUDGE

¶32

avin

¶33

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶34

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

Shashi Bhushan Gupta v. Municipal Corporation Patiala and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shashi Bhushan Gupta v. Municipal Corporation Patiala and 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

Jasbir Singh @ Pammu Vs State of Punjab

Mohinder Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Nirmala Devi Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Karamjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jogesh Kumar and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Balwinder Kaur and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.