MAHITI ADHIKAR GUJARAT PAHEL Vs. STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is filed by an independent registered Public Charitable Trust through its Chief Executive, invoking extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and has sought the following reliefs :-

(2.) The petition is filed basically for raising grievance against the impugned order on the premise that the respondent - authorities have no power to blacklist a person who is seeking information and further has no authority to prevent a citizen from soliciting information for a period of five years. Of course, this petition is not filed by those two aggrieved persons who applied and against whom the impugned orders have been passed. But the present - Trust being a charitable Trust has come forward to assail the orders passed in two different applications by the present combined petitions.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Amresh Patel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner - Trust has submitted that a clear error is committed by the respondent - authorities while passing the impugned orders and further has no authority to place the concerned applicant in blacklist and preventing him from soliciting any information. Such orders are frustrating the very object of the Act and therefore, deserves to be quashed and set aside. Learned advocate Mr. Patel has submitted that the present petitioner is an organization, is helping out such kind of victimized citizens through the petitioner - Trust is not concerned about the veracity or information or value thereof. It is only concerned with these two issues where the prohibition is imposed by the authority and placing the concerned applicant in a blacklist, the Trust has no other intention, and no other concerned about the grievance which is tried to be raised by the applicants against whom the orders have been passed. Learned advocate Mr. Patel has submitted that every citizen has a legitimate expectation that the authority concerned will abide by the law, will maintain spirit and the object of the statue and citizens may not be curbed to raise any voice. If the orders in question are allowed to be operated, according to learned advocate Mr. Patel, the same would oppress the citizens to seek any information under the relevant statute. That being the position, the orders in question are required to be quashed and set aside with consequential directions.