SHAIL SAHNI Vs. VALSA SARA MATHEW AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 30th October, 2015 passed by the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC). Petitioner also seeks information from respondent nos. 1 to 5 with respect to his RTI applications dated 5th March, 2014, 18th February, 2014 and 10th May, 2015 within seven days as well as compensation of Rs. 4 lacs under Ss. 19(8) and 20 of the RTI Act.

(2.) PETITIONER , who appears in person, states that CIC has committed an error in holding that Commission's interference is not required in the matter.

(3.) HOWEVER , a perusal of the impugned order reveals that respondents have stated before CIC that if the petitioner were to file a fresh application with the PIO prioritizing his requirement and identifying the precise information he wants, the same shall be supplied to him. This Court has also perused some of the RTI applications filed by the petitioner and finds that they are general, wide, omnibus and vague. For instance, petitioner's application dated 18th February, 2014 is reproduced hereinbelow: -