JAYACHANDRAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since common issues arise for consideration in these writ petitions, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.18529/2022 is referred to as 'applicant' in this judgment for the sake of convenience. The documents are relied on as they appear in W.P.(C) No. 19962/2022.

(2.) The applicant is a government employee and the office bearer of a service organisation. He made Ext.P2 application dtd. 24/5/2021 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 ( for short, 'the Act') before the Public Information Officer, Office of the Chief Secretary, Government of Kerala requesting for a copy of the report submitted by the committee appointed by the Government to review Contributory Pension Scheme. The application was received by the State Public Information Officer, General Administration (Strictly Confidential) Department (for short, 'SPIO, GAD (SC)') on 27/5/2021. The SPIO, GAD (SC) transferred the said application to the State Public Information Officer of the Finance Department (SPIO, (FD)) in terms of sec. 6(3) of Act with intimation to the applicant, since the matter was concerning the Finance Department. The SPIO, (FD), vide Ext.P4 letter, informed the applicant that steps are being taken by the Government to examine the report submitted by the Committee to review Contributory Pension in detail and to take a policy decision in the matter and the applicant will be provided with a copy of the same when a decision is taken in the matter and as and when the applicant requests for the same.

(3.) The applicant had, in the meantime, filed an appeal under the Act before the appellate authority of the SPIO, GAD (SC) stating that he had not received any reply from the SPIO, GAD(SC) on his application. The appellate authority of the SPIO, GAD (SC), by Ext.P5, informed the applicant that, his application was already transferred to the Finance Department and the grievance, if any, of the applicant must be raised before the appellate authority in the Finance Department. The applicant did not prefer any appeal before the appellate authority in the Finance Department. He filed an appeal before the State Information Commission, Kerala ('the Commission', for brevity) contending that he has not received any information on his application submitted before the SPIO, GAD (SC). The Commission issued notice to the SPIO, GAD (SC), the appellate authority, GAD (SC) and SPIO, (FD). The appellate authority, GAD (SC) as well the SPIO, (FD) filed report before the Commission stating that Ext. P2 application was considered by the SPIO, (FD) and a reply was given.