NATHU VITHOBA SHINGNE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 11/6/2024, following order was passed.

(2.) The issue involved in the present petition has been dealt with by the High Court of Delhi in the case of Rakesh Kumar Gupta Vs. Central Information Commission and anr. [2021 SCC OnLine Del 3512] in following terms.

(3.) The High Court has considered other judgments as well and has held that PIO is responsible for ensuring that the information as sought is provided to the applicant within the statutory requirements of the Act. Sec. 5(4) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short 'RTI Act') is simply to strengthen the authority of the PIO within the department; and if the PIO finds a default by those from whom he has sought information, he is expected to recommend a remedial action to be taken. The PIO is responsible for enforcing the implementation of the Act. The High Court has further held that the Officer from whom assistance has been sought would be also treated as PIO in terms of Sec. 5(5). However, the prime responsibility is of the PIO to furnish the information as sought in terms of the provisions of the RTI Act.