LAWS(DLH)-2012-3-448

ASHOK KUMAR GOEL Vs. PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER VAT

Decided On March 07, 2012
ASHOK KUMAR GOEL Appellant
V/S
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER VAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant herein appears to be a stubborn litigant who is bent upon harassing respondent No. 2, who happens to be none other than the brother of the appellant. The respondent No. 2's firm is registered under the Value Added Tax and is filing returns of its sales etc. with the Sales Tax Commissioner, New Delhi. The appellant wanted certain information from the Sales Tax Commissioner in relation to respondent No. 2 firm and therefore he moved application under the provisions of Right to Information Act, 2005 asking for the following information:

(2.) The CPIO refused to divulge the aforesaid information invoking the provisions of Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act. The appellant approached the Appellate Authority which also rejected the application. Undeterred, the appellant approached the next authority viz. Central Information Commission (CIC) challenging the orders of CPIO and Appellate Authority. To the dismay of the appellant, it met the same fate as the CIC also was of the opinion that the information could not have been divulged to the appellant inasmuch as no public interest was involved or could be shown / established by the appellant. The CIC, in the process, made scathing observations stating that this case depicts how a weapon designed to ease problems of the citizen is at times being misused and totally abused in the hands of people like the appellant to settle personal scores. It was further observed that the public authority providing information to such warring siblings is also in its own way permeating creation of bad blood and recommended that way be found to resolve and avoid such revengeful and negative atmosphere and unhealthy competition.

(3.) Even these scathing observations of CIC did not deter the appellant to challenge the aforesaid order by preferring writ petition. In the writ petition, the learned Single Judge took the same view and dismissed the said writ petition vide impugned order dated 25.01.2012 by imposing cost of Rs. 25,000/-.