KAMALA SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that the date of impugned order has inadvertently been mentioned as "29/7/2016" instead of "25/7/2016" in different parts of the writ petition and thus he may be permitted to correct the same.

(2.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering that date of the impugned order has inadvertently been mentioned as "29/7/2016" instead of "25/7/2016" in different parts of the writ petition, counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make suitable correction in relevant part of the writ petition in course of the day.

(3.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing order dtd. 25/7/2016 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) passed by the Information Commissioner, Jharkhand State Information Commission (the respondent no. 3) in Appeal Case No. 3140 of 2015, copy of which has been communicated to the petitioner as well as the respondent no. 2 vide memo no. 17117 dtd. 29/7/2016, whereby the Public Information Officer-cum-District Programme Officer, Giridih has been imposed penalty of Rs.25,000.00 under Sec. 20(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (in short, "the Act, 2005") and he has been directed to get the said penalty amount deducted from his salary in five equal installments by depositing the same in the District Treasury, Giridih, as well as to produce evidence in that regard on the next date of hearing.