CUSTOM SEARCH

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER CANNOT DIRECT TO GIVE INFORMATION IN A COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 18 ONLY APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAVE SUCH POWER UNDER SECTION 19.

READ FULL JUDGMENT
Supreme Court Bench Consisting of: Justice G.S. Singhvi, Justice Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya in a case of Chief Information Commr.& Anr vs State Of Manipur & Anr Decided on 12-12-2011: “The nature of the power under Section 18 is supervisory in character whereas the procedure under Section 19 is an appellate procedure and a person who is aggrieved by refusal in receiving the information which he has sought for can only seek redress in the manner provided in the statute, namely, by following the procedure under Section 19. This Court is, therefore, of the opinion that Section 7 read with Section 19 provides a complete statutory mechanism to a person who is aggrieved by refusal to receive information. Such person has to get the information by following the aforesaid statutory provisions. The contention of the appellant that information can be accessed through Section 18 is contrary to the express provision of Section 19 of the Act. It is well known when a procedure is laid down statutorily and there is no challenge to the said statutory procedure the Court should not, in the name of interpretation, lay down a procedure which is contrary to the express statutory provision.”

1 comment:

dr.pkaditya@gmail.com said...

Kindly permit me to point out that the basic reason why the complainant u/s 18 has not to be given information directly is because of 18(1)(f) is the only provision in the RTI Act which permits a complainant who observes lack of information published on websites to point out lapse, to be made good on the website, without having to file an RTI request to the PIO. the words 'any other' in 18(1)(f) is distinguished from clauses (a) to (e). I will appreciate for any comments on this line of interpretation. Thanks dr.pkaditya@gmail.com

CASE LAW ON LAND LAWS

KARNATAKA LAND LAWS