AMIT KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA Vs. CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking a writ, order or direction to impugn the order dated 15.01.2018 passed by the Central Information Commission (CIC).

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that he filed an RTI Application on 05.09.2016 under Rule 6 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the RTI Act') seeking disclosure of point wise information which was mentioned at serial No. 5(i) to 5(xxv) of the said application. It is claimed that the CPIO did not provide correct information in respect of point 5(i) of the RTI application. The CPIO hid the cases registered under IPC/PC Act. It is also claimed that the CPIO misled regarding the other issues.

(3.) The petitioner filed a first appeal on 10.10.2016 before the First Appellate Authority. It is stated that the Appellate Authority did not decide the appeal of the petitioner in the defined period. The petitioner filed a second appeal before the Second Appellate Authority CIC. It is the grievance of the petitioner that during the hearing, the respondent believed the verbal submissions of the CPIO instead of the written submissions of the petitioner and allowed them to sustain their stand for non-disclosure of the information in respect of all the points by claiming exemption under Section 8(1) (h) of the RTI Act. Hence, the present writ petition.