Cruelty Need Not Be Physical: Mental Agony and Emotional Distress Are Sufficient Grounds for Divorce: Supreme Court Section 195 Cr.P.C. | Tribunals Are Not Courts: Private Complaints for Offences Like False Evidence Valid: Supreme Court Limitation | Right to Appeal Is Fundamental, Especially When Liberty Is at Stake: Supreme Court Condones 1637-Day Delay FIR Quashed | No Mens Rea, No Crime: Supreme Court Emphasizes Protection of Public Servants Acting in Good Faith Trademark | Passing Off Rights Trump Registration Rights: Delhi High Court A Minor Procedural Delay Should Not Disqualify Advances as Export Credit When Exports Are Fulfilled on Time: Bombay HC Preventive Detention Must Be Based on Relevant and Proximate Material: J&K High Court Terrorism Stems From Hateful Thoughts, Not Physical Abilities: Madhya Pradesh High Court Denies Bail of Alleged ISIS Conspiracy Forwarding Offensive Content Equals Liability: Madras High Court Upholds Conviction for Derogatory Social Media Post Against Women Journalists Absence of Receipts No Barrier to Justice: Madras High Court Orders Theft Complaint Referral Under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C Rajasthan High Court Emphasizes Rehabilitation, Grants Probation to 67-Year-Old Convicted of Kidnapping" P&H High Court Dismisses Contempt Petition Against Advocate Renuka Chopra: “A Frustrated Outburst Amid Systemic Challenges” Kerala High Court Criticizes Irregularities in Sabarimala Melsanthi Selection, Orders Compliance with Guidelines Non-Payment of Rent Does Not Constitute Criminal Breach of Trust: Calcutta High Court Administrative Orders Cannot Override Terminated Contracts: Rajasthan High Court Affirms in Landmark Decision Minimum Wage Claims Must Be Resolved by Designated Authorities Under the Minimum Wages Act, Not the Labour Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court Madras High Court Confirms Equal Coparcenary Rights for Daughters, Emphasizes Ancestral Property Rights

High Court Directs State Information Commission To Reconsider RTI Appeal And Must Give Specific Findings As Per Law

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh has directed the State Information Commission, Haryana, to reevaluate an appeal filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, emphasizing compliance with established legal principles. The decision comes in response to a writ petition filed by Arun Kumar Aggarwal, challenging the denial of information requested under the RTI Act.

"A perusal of the above judgment would show that the first appellate authority as well as the second appellate authority has to give specific findings in accordance with the five points, which have been formulated in the abovesaid judgment."

The petitioner had sought information on five specific points under the RTI Act. However, the State Information Commission's order dated 09.10.2023 was found to be inconsistent with the legal precedents set by the High Court in a previous case titled "Rajwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab and others" decided on 16.08.2023. In that case, the Court had emphasized the need for detailed, point-wise decisions on information requests, including reasons for non-disclosure if applicable.

"The impugned order dated 09.10.2023 has not been passed in compliance with the judgment passed by this Court in Rajwinder Singh’s case (supra) and thus, the said order deserves to be set aside."

As a result, the High Court partially allowed the petition and set aside the impugned order, directing the State Information Commission, Haryana, to reevaluate the petitioner's appeal expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of the present order.

Date of Decision: 25.01.2024

Arun Kumar Aggarwal VS The State Information Commission

 

Similar News