D.P. JANGRA Vs. STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matrix of the facts, which needs a necessary mention for a limited purpose of deciding the core controversy involved in the instant writ petition and emanating from the record, is that Petitioner-D.P. Jangra was posted as District Food and Supplies Controller, Yamuna Nagar. Shamsher Singh (Respondent No. 5) son of Kathu Ram sought information under The Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act"), relating to the expenditure, movable and immovable properties of the Petitioner, vide application dated 18.01.2010. He has also sought copies of the permissions obtained by the Petitioner to purchase/sell the property. The same were not supplied to him by the State Public Information Officer(for short "the SPIO"). Dissatisfied with it, the private Respondent filed the first appeal, but the information was not supplied to him as well by the First Appellate Authority(for brevity "the FAA").

(2.) Aggrieved by the action of the SPIO and the FAA, Respondent No. 5 filed the second appeal before the State Information Commissioner, Haryana(for brevity "the SIC"). During the course of hearing of the second appeal, the SIC passed the impugned order dated 21.07.2010(Annexure P-4). The operative part of which is, as under:

(3.) Not only that, instead of supplying the requisite information, the FAA and the SPIO contended that as per arguments of the Petitioner, the information sought by Respondent No. 5, cannot be furnished, since, the same is covered under Section 8(e)(j) of the Act. However, their plea was negatived and the SIC directed them to supply the information vide impugned order dated 09.08.2010(Annexure P-14). The operative part of which is, as follows: