SURAJBHAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHAT is not disputed here is that Petitioner -Surajbhan moved various applications i.e. applications dated 26.09.2006 (Annexure P1) and 13.10.2006 (Annexure P3) to the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Bawal, District Rewari (for brevity "BDPO") and application dated 12.10.2006 (Annexure P2) to Sarpanch, Village Kalrawas, District Rewari for making arrangement of drainage of dirty water of the village. He also moved similar applications dated 26.10.2006 (Annexure P4) and 07.11.2006 (Annexure P5) to Deputy Commissioner, Rewari -Respondent No. 3 (for brevity "DC") to improve the drainage system in the village.

(2.) THEREAFTER , he moved application dated 16.01.2007 (Annexure P -6) before the Public Information Officer -Respondent No. 7 (for brevity "the PIO") and sought the information, in view of the provisions of The Right to Information Act, 2005 and Rules framed therein (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act/Rules") relating to day to day proceedings on his applications, the applications were sent to which officer, who took how many days to deal with it, names and designation of the officers who were required to take action on the applications, action taken against these officers for not performing their duty properly and when the arrangement of drainage of dirty water will be made.

(3.) ALTHOUGH , the information was supplied to the Petitioner but he again filed the second appeal before the State Information Commission -Respondent No. 6 (for short "the SIC") (Appellate Authority), which was disposed of, by means of impugned order dated 09.10.2007 (Annexure P16)