Right to Information Act, 2005 — Section 20(2) — Liability of Public Information Officer

February 21st, 2013

Right to Information Act, 2005 — Section 20(2) — Liability of Public Information Officer — Recommendation for departmental proceedings — Order passed without giving opportunity of hearing, effect — Appellant requested Commission for adjournment but request was declined — Order for initiation of disciplinary action was passed on the ground of negligence — Held, on the first date of hearing and in the letter, he had given a reasonable cause for his absence before the Commission, however, impugned order was passed — Appellant was entitled to a hearing before an order could be passed against him under the provisions of Section 20(2) of the Act — The State Information Commission not only recommended but directed initiation of departmental proceedings against the appellant and even asked for the compliance report — If such a harsh order was to be passed against the appellant, the least that was expected of the Commission was to grant him a hearing/reasonable opportunity to put forward his case — We are of the considered view that the State Information Commission should have granted an adjournment and heard the appellant before passing an order under Section 20(2) of the Act — On that ground itself, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

(Para 25)

Manohar v. State of Maharashtra[Bench Strength 2], Civil Appeal No. 9095/2012 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 7529/2009)(13/12/2012), 2012(12) SCALE 601: 2012(9) SLT 661 [Swatanter Kumar, J.: Madan B. Lokur, J.]

Entry Filed under: Judgements,Right to Information

Leave a Comment


Required, hidden

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

News That Matters

Recent Posts


Important Links