DOMINIC Vs. STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Heard finally with consent of counsel for the parties.

(2.) It is the grievance of the petitioner that while entertaining a complaint under Section 18(1)(e) of the Right To Information Act, 2005 (for short, 'the said Act')in the context of non-supply of relevant information as directed, the initial order that was passed in the complaint directing supply of such information has been revoked. According to the petitioner, this exercise is beyond the jurisdiction of the State Information Commission.

(3.) The petitioner sought information under the provisions of the said Act from the respondent no.2 by moving an application on 04.05.2013. Reply was given to the petitioner that since the respondent no.2 was not a public authority, the information sought was not liable to be supplied. The petitioner on 14.06.2013 reiterated his request for supply of said information and as the same was not provided, filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority under Section 19(1) of the said Act. On 30.08.2013, the first Appellate Authority directed the respondent no.2 to supply the requisite information within a period of seven days. A further appeal came to be filed by the petitioner under Section 19(2) of the said Act on the ground that the said information as directed to be supplied was not furnished. In the said appeal, the Information Commission on 15.01.2015 while allowing that appeal directed the respondent no.2 to show cause why action under Section 20 including imposing of penalty should not be ordered on account of non- compliance of the earlier directions. Since that order was not complied with, the petitioner moved a fresh complaint under Section 18(1)(e) of the said Act and by the impugned order dated 19.10.2015, the State Information Commissioner has held that the respondent no.2 was not liable to furnish the requisite information as initially directed. Being aggrieved, the present writ petition has been filed.