SANJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dtd. 2/6/2017 (Annexure-12 to the writ petition) passed by the Information Commissioner, Jharkhand State Information Commission [hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission'], Ranchi-the respondent No.2 in Appeal Case No. 2336 of 2014 whereby a penalty of Rs.25,000.00 has been imposed upon the petitioner under Sec. 20(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 2005'] with a further direction issued to the respondent No.5 to initiate departmental proceeding against him under Sec. 20(2) of the Act, 2005.

(2.) Learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.3 had filed an application on 20/6/2014 for providing details of some land situated at Mouza-Khurd Khuntikewal, Thana No. 44, and Mouza-Kanchanpur, Thana No. 147 of Hunterganj Block under Chatra District. However, the then Assistant Settlement Officer-cum-Public Information Officer, Hazaribagh did not supply those information to the respondent No.3 within the statutory period of 30 days. Thereafter, the respondent No.3 preferred an appeal before the Settlement Officer at Hazaribagh on 23/7/2014, however, the required information was not supplied to him. Subsequently, the respondent No.3 preferred second appeal before the respondent No.2 on 7/11/2014 which was registered as Appeal No. 2336 of 2014. A notice was issued to the Public Information Officer-cum-Assistant Settlement Officer, Hazaribagh vide letter No. 5695 dtd. 5/6/2015 to show cause by presenting himself before the Commission on 1/7/2015 as to why an appropriate order should not be passed against him for not providing the required information to the respondent No.3, failing which an ex-parte order would be passed against him. The Public Information Officer did not appear before the Commission on 1/7/2015 and hence last chance was given to him to provide the required information to the respondent No.3 and to ensure his presence before the Commission on the next date fixed i.e. 5/10/2015. Thereafter, the Public Information Officer-cumAssistant Settlement Officer, Hazaribagh issued letter dtd. 2/7/2015 to the Officer-in-Charge, District Record Room, Chatra to supply the required information to the respondent No.3 which was finally supplied to him by the Officer-in-Charge, District Record Room, Chatra vide his letter as contained in memo No. 39 dtd. 13/7/2015 and the copies of the same were sent to the Public Information Officer-cum-Assistant Settlement Officer, Hazaribagh as well as the Commission.

(3.) Learned Sr. counsel further submits that though the required information was supplied to the respondent No.3, the Commission vide order dtd. 13/4/2017 passed in Appeal No. 2336 of 2014, imposed a penalty of Rs.25,000.00 upon the respondent No.4 under Sec. 20(1) of the Act, 2005 observing that the Public Information Officer, Hazaribagh was given last chance either to file explanation before the Commission or to provide the required information to the respondent No.3 vide order dtd. 31/8/2016, however, he failed to do so. Thereafter, the respondent No.4 vide application dtd. 19/5/2017 informed the respondent No.2 that the Assistant Settlement Officer, Hazaribagh, who was posted on 31/8/2016 and was notified as the Public Information Officer, should be held responsible for non-supply of the information to the respondent No.3 whereupon the respondent No.2 vide the impugned order dtd. 2/6/2017 reviewed his earlier order whereby the petitioner was imposed a penalty of Rs.25,000.00 to be realized in five equal instalments from his salary. It was further directed that a departmental proceeding be initiated against the petitioner under Sec. 20(2) of the Act, 2005.