SUVARDHAN Vs. STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue which crops up for consideration before this Court is as to whether on imposition of penalty on the Public Information Officer, as appointed under the Right to Information Act of 2005, the penalty provided u/s 20, which happens to be a liability in persona could be challenged, by him in person, by availing the professional services of the Chief Standing Counsel and its machinery and state money can be used for the said purpose, contrary to the provisions and purpose of their appointments under Legal Remembrancer Manual.

(2.) For a logical conclusion, certain provisions contained in the Manual are necessarily required to be considered. Under Chapter V of Legislative Secretarycum-Legal Remembrancer Manual, in its clause 5.04 deals with the duties attached to the office of Chief Standing Counsel, it enumerates the area of duties of the Chief Standing Counsel, in the sub-clauses contained under clause 5.04. In the interpretation clauses of Chapter 1, the term "Authority" has not been defined. Though in sub-clause (8) of clause 1.02, it defines Chief Standing Counsel, which includes within its ambit the Standing Counsels of the High Courts. Meaning thereby, on the definition of a Chief Standing Counsel as provided under clause 1.02, it would include within its ambit the Additional Chief Standing Counsel also. Under the duties defined in clause 5.04 sub-clause (3) in particular for the purpose of present case, it reads as under:-

(3.) The term authority herein used would mean the 'office' and not the government officer personally, more particularly, when the office of Chief Standing Counsel is called to defend personal liability of an officer, who has been harnessed individually with a liability under law, it imposes a personal liability for dereliction of duty by an officer. The duties so far as defined and which fall within the ambit of the office of the Additional Chief Standing Counsel or the Chief Standing Counsel to be discharged under the LR Manual, is to represent the cause of the State or any authority within the State in such other civil cases by or on behalf of state, where it involves stakes of the state, and its states interest which is affected, in which Chief Standing Counsel might be directed or required to appear by the Govt. and for the Govt. So the form represent as contained under sub-clause (3) of clause 5.05, means representation for a cause taken against a State or its authority to defend the State and its interests before the court of law. In the absence of the term authority being defined under the Manual, its interpretation could be derived from the term authority as literally defined under the legal glossary, which defines the word "authority" as under:-