CHAMARAJ H.PATIL Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is knocking at the doors of Writ Court for assailing the penalty orders dtd. 15/6/2017 and 8/11/2017 issued by the 1st respondent respectively at Annexures-J & M to the petition.

(2.) After service of notice, 1st respondent having entered appearance through its panel counsel, opposes the Writ Petition making submission in justification of the impugned orders and the reasons on which they have been constructed. The 2nd respondent having been unserved, is given up by the petitioner by filing a Memo dtd. 27/7/2022.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition Papers, this court is inclined to grant indulgence in the matter inasmuch as the RTI application was filed on 26/9/2014; the required information was furnished on 28/1/2015 and this was beyond the statutory limit of thirty days; thus, there is delay brooked in the matter, is apparent. However, the petitioner occupied the office of Public Information Officer cum Tahasildar only with effect from 27/3/2017 and therefore, the penalty contemplated under Sec. 20 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 could not have been levied on him at all, as rightly submitted by his counsel.