K.K.REMANI Vs. STATE INFORMATION OFFICER, KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is preferred by the State Information Officer (SIO) of the Home Department, Government of Kerala, aggrieved by Ext.P1 order passed by the State Information Commissioner under Sec. 19(3) and Sec. 20 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), holding that the writ petitioner was responsible for a delay of 43 days in providing the information as sought for by the second respondent, and imposing a penalty of Rs.10,750.00 within 30 days from the receipt of the order, failing which the said amount was ordered to be recovered from the salary of the petitioner.

(2.) The second respondent herein made an application dtd. 19/9/2006, Ext.P2, before the State Assistant Public Information Officer, Home Department, requesting a copy of the report furnished by the Director General of Prosecution regarding the implementation of the Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Act, 2005 with regard to Sec. 25A. Ext.P2 application was received as aforesaid on the same day. Since the information sought related to the Home (C) Department, Ext.P2 application was forwarded to that Sec. on 22/9/2006 as per Ext.P3 communication. The second respondent filed an appeal on 20/10/2006 before the Assistant Public Information Officer, Ext.P4, which was addressed to the Chief Public Information Officer, Home Department. It is the contention of the writ petitioner that she is not the appellate authority under the Right to Information Act and that the receipt of Ext.P2 application was, in fact, brought to the notice of the writ petitioner only on 20/10/2006 and the writ petitioner being the original authority under the Act, transferred Ext.P2 application on 20/10/2006 itself to the Director General of Prosecution for further action in the matter in tune with Sec. 6(3) of the Act, as per Ext.P5 communication. Unfortunately, while sending Ext.P5, an inadvertent mistake crept in as it was addressed to Y.Anilkumar, I.G. (Administration), Office of the Director General of Prosecution, Ernakulam.

(3.) The Director General of Prosecution, by his letter dtd. 30/10/2006, informed the writ petitioner that Ext.P2 application was seen received in his office and that Ext.P5 letter is seen addressed to Y.Anilkumar, I.G. (Administration), who had nothing to do with the matter in issue. This was intimated by Ext.P6 letter dtd. 30/10/2006. Copy of Ext.P2 application was again transferred to the Director General of Prosecution on 6/11/2006 by the Under Secretary, Home (C) Department by Ext.P7, and ultimately, the Director General of Prosecution vide its letter dtd. 15/11/2006 forwarded a copy of the information sought by the second respondent and the same was received in the Government on 20/11/2006.