Unfinished Sports Infrastructure And Limited Recruitment In Jammu Kashmir, Reveals RTI Data

ETV Bharat: Srinagar: Sunday, 16 August 2026.
RTI data reveals Jammu and Kashmir filled only 60 sports department vacancies in five years, with 128 sports infrastructure projects unfinished due to funding shortages.

File photo of Jammu Kashmir Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha at a felicitation ceremony of a sports event. (ANI)

The Jammu and Kashmir Youth Services and Sports Department filled only 60 vacancies during Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha’s five-year tenure, according to Right to Information (RTI) data. It also revealed that at least 128 sports infrastructure projects remained unfinished due to funding shortages.
The details were provided by the Directorate of Youth Services and Sports in response to a query by RTI activist and journalist MM Shuja.
According to the department, the posts filled during the period included 19 physical education lecturers, 35 junior assistants and six multi-tasking staff members.
The RTI response also revealed that 128 sports infrastructure projects across Jammu and Kashmir could not be completed during 2024 and 2025 because of inadequate funding.

File photo of athletes showcase their skills during an event organised by Jammu and Kashmir Sports Council as part of the Khelo India 10 Ka Dum programme, at Indoor Stadium Polo View, in Srinagar on Mar 16, 2023. (ANI)

The delayed projects include playfields, indoor sports halls, synthetic athletic tracks, football turfs, hockey fields, volleyball courts, badminton courts and basketball grounds in several districts across the Union Territory.
Among the major pending projects are a synthetic athletic track at Khelgaon Nagrota in Jammu, a synthetic turf hockey field at the same venue, a synthetic football turf at Parade Ground Jammu, a synthetic hockey field at Government Boys Higher Secondary School Poonch, a synthetic football turf at Government College of Physical Education Ganderbal and a youth hostel at GCOPE Ganderbal.
The department said the projects are being executed by agencies including the Jammu and Kashmir Sports Council, the Public Works Department and the Rural Development Department.
Official records indicate that some projects were delayed because work had not started, while others were retendered or faced site-related issues. In one case, funds for a synthetic hockey field in Poonch were surrendered after the contractor failed to begin work.

Delhi High Court Refuses RTI Disclosure of Bank Officer’s Vigilance and Promotion Records; Holds Personal Information Protected Where Larger Public Interest Is Not Established

Raw Law: New Delhi: Sunday, 16 August 2026.
Delhi High Court Dismisses LPA Seeking Vigilance and DPC Material; Holds Personal Promotion Records Cannot Be Disclosed Without Stronger Public Interest

Facts
The Delhi High Court considered a Letters Patent Appeal filed by Chayan Ghosh Chowdhury challenging the dismissal of his writ petition concerning information sought from Punjab & Sind Bank under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The judgment was delivered on 14 August 2026.
The appellant had filed an RTI application on 12 January 2024 seeking information relating to one Pankaj Dwivedi, an employee of the Bank who had been promoted to Scale VI on 1 April 2018 and thereafter to Scale VII on 1 April 2020.
The information sought included copies of the Vigilance Clearance Certificates relied upon by the Departmental Promotion Committee before both promotions, along with complete file notings, office notes, circulars, Office Memoranda, IBA/CVC guidelines and Board Resolutions relied upon in constituting the relevant DPCs. The appellant also sought details of the Chief Vigilance Officer.
The Public Information Officer supplied the CVO details but denied the vigilance-clearance and promotion-related records under Section 8(1)(j) RTI Act, holding them to be personal information of a third party whose disclosure did not serve any public activity or interest.
The First Appellate Authority affirmed the PIO’s decision. The Central Information Commission subsequently dismissed the second appeal on 20 March 2025, also holding that the requested information was personal information protected by Section 8(1)(j). The Single Judge then dismissed W.P.(C) 12204/2025 on 2 February 2026.
The appellant thereafter filed the present intra-court appeal.
Issues
The principal issues before the Division Bench were:

1. Whether the vigilance-clearance certificates and DPC-related records concerning an individual bank officer constituted personal information under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
2. Whether the appellant had demonstrated a sufficiently strong larger public interest to override that exemption under Section 8(2).
3. Whether the PIO, First Appellate Authority and CIC had failed to undertake the required public-interest balancing exercise.
4. Whether pending allegations of sexual harassment and criminal complaints against the promoted officer justified disclosure of the vigilance material relied upon for his promotions.
5. Whether disclosure of internal DPC file notings, CVC guidelines and related promotion material served a legitimate public purpose.
6. Whether the Single Judge’s dismissal of the writ petition warranted interference in appeal.

Appellant’s Arguments
The appellant fairly conceded that the information sought at serial nos. 1 to 4 fell within Section 8(1)(j) because it concerned personal information of a third party.
His argument, however, was that Section 8(2) required disclosure because public interest outweighed any possible harm to the individual’s privacy.
The appellant contended that when Pankaj Dwivedi was promoted to Scale VI and later Scale VII, he was allegedly facing proceedings under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 as well as a criminal complaint under Sections 354A and 509 IPC.
According to the appellant, if vigilance clearances were issued and relied upon despite those pending allegations, the public had an interest in knowing whether the promotions of an officer of a nationalised bank had been lawfully granted.
He further argued that neither the RTI authorities nor the Single Judge had properly considered whether the public interest in disclosure outweighed the privacy harm, as expressly contemplated by Section 8(2).
Respondent’s Arguments
Punjab & Sind Bank opposed the appeal.
It submitted that the information admittedly concerned an identifiable individual and therefore constituted personal information.
According to the Bank, disclosure served no public purpose and would instead cause prejudice and harm to the individual concerned.
The Bank maintained that the Single Judge had correctly applied the statutory exemption and that no ground for interference was made out.
Analysis of the Law
Information Was Admittedly Personal
The Division Bench began by noting that even the appellant accepted that the requested vigilance and promotion materials were covered by Section 8(1)(j).
The real controversy was therefore not whether the information was personal, but whether the public-interest override under Section 8(2) required its disclosure.
PIO Had Considered Public Interest
The Court rejected the appellant’s argument that the RTI authorities had mechanically invoked Section 8(1)(j) without considering public interest.
The PIO’s response expressly stated that disclosure of the information “does not serve any public activity or interest” and therefore fell within the exemption.
The First Appellate Authority concurred with that conclusion.
Accordingly, the High Court held that it was incorrect to say that the public-interest issue had not been considered at all.
CIC Also Applied Privacy–Public Interest Balance
The Central Information Commission had relied upon the Supreme Court judgment in Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal.
The CIC noted that professional records such as qualifications, performance assessments, evaluation reports, ACRs and disciplinary proceedings are ordinarily personal information entitled to protection against unwarranted invasion of privacy.
Disclosure is permissible only where a larger public interest justifies overriding that protection.
The Division Bench therefore rejected the contention that the CIC had ignored Section 8(2).
Vigilance Clearance Certificate Does Not Serve Public Purpose Merely Because Officer Was Promoted
The Court specifically considered the request for the vigilance-clearance certificates relied upon before the promotions in 2018 and 2020.
It held that disclosure of the vigilance clearance concerning an individual employee did not serve any public purpose in the circumstances of the case.
On the contrary, disclosure could cause personal harm and prejudice to the individual concerned.
The information was therefore rightly withheld under Section 8(1)(j).
DPC Files and Promotion Material Also Protected
The appellant had also sought extensive materials including file notings, office notes, circulars, OMs, CVC guidelines and Board Resolutions relied upon in constituting the DPCs responsible for the officer’s promotions.
The High Court held that, in the context in which they were sought, these materials were directly connected with the promotion of a particular individual.
The Court characterised the request as appearing to amount to an attempt at “micro-management of the affairs of the respondent-Bank.”
It held that public interest in disclosure did not outweigh the potential personal harm to the promoted officer.
Pending Sexual Harassment or Criminal Complaints Did Not Automatically Trigger Disclosure
A significant aspect of the appellant’s case was that the officer was allegedly facing sexual-harassment proceedings and criminal allegations when vigilance clearance was granted.
The Court nevertheless declined to treat those allegations as sufficient, by themselves, to establish a larger public interest requiring disclosure.
The statutory test under Section 8(2) requires an actual balancing exercise between:

• the public benefit of disclosure; and
• the harm to the protected privacy interest.

The Court found that the appellant had not shown a public-interest justification strong enough to overcome the privacy protection.
RTI Cannot Become a Tool for Monitoring Individual Personnel Decisions
The judgment draws an important distinction between transparency in public institutions and indiscriminate access to personal service records.
The Court accepted that Punjab & Sind Bank is a public authority, but held that this does not make all material relating to promotions, vigilance or individual service matters automatically public.
Where information concerns the promotion of a particular employee, the requester must demonstrate a larger and identifiable public interest, rather than merely seek to scrutinise or supervise the internal personnel administration of the institution.
Precedent Analysis
CPIO, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal
This was the principal precedent relied upon by the CIC and High Court.
The Supreme Court recognised that personal and professional records, including performance-related material and disciplinary information, fall within the sphere of privacy.
Such information is protected unless disclosure is justified by a sufficiently compelling larger public interest.
CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay
The Single Judge had relied upon this Supreme Court decision while considering the limits of the right to information and balancing transparency against competing statutory interests.
Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central Information Commissioner
This judgment was also relied upon for the proposition that information concerning an employee’s service matters and disciplinary or employment-related records is ordinarily personal information.
Disclosure cannot be compelled merely because the employee works for a public authority unless a larger public interest is demonstrated.
CPIO, Supreme Court of India v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal
The Single Judge again relied upon this authority specifically to reject the invocation of the Section 8(2) public-interest exception in the facts of the case.
Court’s Reasoning
The Division Bench found no flaw in the approach adopted by the PIO, First Appellate Authority, CIC or Single Judge.
The appellant’s case was not that the requested information fell outside Section 8(1)(j); that exemption was expressly conceded.
His only route to disclosure was therefore Section 8(2).
However, each authority had considered whether disclosure served a public purpose and had concluded that it did not.
The Court found that the requested documents were intimately connected with an individual officer’s vigilance status and promotion process.
Even the existence of allegations against the officer did not automatically convert his personal service records into public information.
The Court therefore concluded that the potential public benefit of disclosure did not outweigh the privacy harm.
Conclusion
The Delhi High Court held that vigilance-clearance certificates and promotion-related records concerning an individual officer are personal information protected under Section 8(1)(j) RTI Act, unless a larger public interest justifies disclosure.
It found no such overriding public interest in the present case.
The Court further held that seeking extensive DPC file material relating to an individual promotion appeared to amount to an attempt to micro-manage the Bank’s internal affairs.
Accordingly, the Division Bench found no ground to interfere with the Single Judge’s judgment.
The appeal was dismissed, with no order as to costs.
Case Details Case: Chayan Ghosh Chowdhury v. Punjab and Sind Bank & Anr.
Court: Delhi High Court
Case Number: LPA 558/2026; CNR No. DLHC010323042026
Judges: Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia
Date: 14 August 2026
Date: 14 August 2026
Result: Appeal dismissed; denial of vigilance-clearance certificates and promotion-related records under Section 8(1)(j) RTI Act upheld for absence of overriding larger public interest.
(Click to download Order)

Institutional failure is depleting our forests

The Daily Star: Bangladesh: Sunday, 16 August 2026.

The degree of indifference and neglect seen from the authorities when it comes to saving our forests is unacceptable and alarming, considering the accelerating rate of deforestation across the country. According to Global Forest Watch, Bangladesh lost around 9.4 thousand hectares of humid primary forest between 2002 and 2025. Additionally, the country’s humid primary forests shrank by 10 percent over two decades. Despite such alarming data, we do not see enough coordinated institutional efforts to save our forests, even though Bangladesh does not lack relevant laws or institutions.
A recent story published by this daily illustrates how illegal sand extraction and encroachment have deepened the damage in an already depleted Garjan Forest in Cox’s Bazar. The Paglir Bil Road area, located about 2.5 kilometres southeast of Dulahazara Bazar in Chakaria upazila, was once shaded by towering Garjan trees. Today, these trees have largely disappeared, replaced by wild shrubs and smaller acacia trees. The Forest Department’s social forestry initiative, introduced after 2012, has failed to yield positive results, largely because the trees planted by locals are indiscriminately felled.
Meanwhile, despite visible sand extraction, government agencies cannot seem to agree on who exactly is responsible for conservation efforts in the area. Forest Department officials claim they cannot take legal action for sand extraction as the area is not a reserved forest. The district administration says that without the Department of Environment’s (DoE) involvement, their hands are tied. Meanwhile, the DoE said it had no scope to act under the existing soil and sand management law in this case, alleging the district administration held the jurisdiction to do so. Such confusion among concerned authorities is deeply frustrating. If no government agency is willing to take responsibility for a forest that is being depleted by truckloads, what is the point of having multiple agencies tasked with ensuring environmental protection?
Unfortunately, many forests across the country are withering away due to illegal settlements, development projects, and commercial ventures, and other extractive activities. In many cases, politically connected local actors exploit weak enforcement to continue operating with impunity, as has been the case for Garjan Forest. We, therefore, strongly urge the relevant authorities to come together and formulate a plan to protect this forest from further exploitation and chart a course of action for its restoration. It is high time the government at large stopped seeing forests as isolated patches of land and began treating them with the dignity and protection they deserve.

SC Says RTI Activism Has Become a ‘New Business’, Denies Anticipatory Bail to Activist : By Saket Sourav

LSJ: New Delhi: Saturday, 15 August 2026.

In a significant observation on the perceived misuse of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the Supreme Court recently remarked that RTI activism has evolved into a “new business.” The observation came while the Court was hearing a plea for anticipatory bail filed by an activist accused of obstructing a public servant during a government road construction project.
A Bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Vijay Bishnoi dismissed the plea for pre-arrest bail filed by Ramesh Kumar Behl and expressed strong disapproval of individuals who, under the guise of RTI activism, interfere with public works and harass government officials.
During the hearing, Justice Sandeep Mehta made sharp oral observations regarding the conduct of self-styled RTI activists. He remarked that RTI activism had effectively become a new profession and likened such conduct to “yellow journalism.”
The Bench observed that when government funds are allocated for infrastructure projects, designated authorities are responsible for monitoring and supervising the work. Questioning the petitioner’s role, Justice Mehta referred to him as a “so-called RTI activist” and observed that such individuals have no role in interfering with the execution of public projects.
Justice Vijay Bishnoi also questioned the petitioner’s locus standi to monitor the progress of the road construction work. The Court asked under whose authority the petitioner was supervising the project and whether he possessed any official role empowering him to oversee the work.
The Bench further observed that supervision and monitoring of public infrastructure projects fall within the exclusive domain of the authorities entrusted with their implementation. The observations reflect judicial concern that, in some cases, the RTI mechanism—intended to promote transparency and accountability may be used to exert unauthorized influence over public administration.
The case arose from an FIR alleging that the petitioner and another accused obstructed an ongoing road construction project. According to the prosecution, the accused intimidated the site supervisor and labourers present at the location.
The FIR further alleged that the petitioner assaulted the supervisor, while the co-accused physically attacked the supervisor by kicking him. The prosecution also alleged that caste-based derogatory remarks were made against labourers working at the site.
Based on these allegations, an FIR was registered under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The petitioner approached the Supreme Court after the Punjab and Haryana High Court rejected his application for anticipatory bail. The High Court had observed that the allegations disclosed specific involvement of the petitioner in obstructing government work and found no grounds to grant the discretionary relief of pre-arrest protection.
Upon consideration of the matter, the Supreme Court agreed with the High Court’s assessment and declined to interfere.
The Court noted that public projects are executed through established governmental frameworks and that interference by self-appointed monitors can hamper infrastructure development. By describing such conduct as a “business” and comparing it to “yellow journalism,” the Court drew a distinction between genuine efforts to promote transparency and actions that create administrative hurdles under the guise of activism.
Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition and permitted the investigation to proceed in accordance with law.
Case Title: Ramesh Kumar Behl v. State of Punjab | SLP (Crl.) No. 10257 of 2026

SC, ST, OBC faculty make up 13.1 pc at IIT-Kanpur, 21.9 pc at IIT-BHU: RTI.

Economic Times: New Delhi: Friday, August 14, 2026.

SC, ST, and OBC communities comprise 13.1 percent of IIT-Kanpur's working faculty. IIT-BHU Varanasi reported 21.9 percent representation from these communities. Representation is notably lower at the professor level for all three groups. Assistant professor ranks show considerably higher representation at both institutes. Data was provided by the institutes under the Right to Information Act. 

Members from the SC, ST and OBC communities account for 13.1 per cent of the working faculty at IIT-Kanpur and 21.9 per cent at IIT (BHU) Varanasi, according to the information provided by the two institutes under the RTI Act. The three communities make up 76 of 581 working faculty members at IIT-Kanpur and 82 of 374 at IIT (BHU) Varanasi, the RTI replies showed. When contacted by PTI on Thursday, IIT Kanpur officials said the information was "imprecise", while IIT BHU confirmed the data. However, both premier institutes said they would be able to share a detailed response later.At IIT-Kanpur, the category-wise data shows that 25 faculty members are from the Scheduled Caste (SC), five from the Scheduled Tribe (ST) and 46 from the Other Backward Classes (OBC) category.

At the professor level, the representation is particularly low. Of the institute's 257 professors, none are from the SC or ST communities, and only three are from the OBC category. The remaining 254 are from the unreserved category.

Among 128 associate professors, there are eight SC, one ST and seven OBC faculty members. Of the 193 assistant professors, 17 are SC, four ST and 36 OBC.

At IIT-BHU, 30 faculty members are from the SC, five from the ST and 47 from the OBC category, out of 374 filled positions across the three academic ranks. Of the 129 professors at IIT-BHU, 11 are SC, one ST and two OBC, while 113 are from the unreserved category. Two professors are also listed under the Persons with Disabilities category.

Among 88 associate professors, seven are OBC and four are SC, with no ST faculty member. Of the 157 assistant professors, 15 are SC, four ST and 38 OBC. The data shows that representation of SC, ST and OBC faculty is considerably higher at the assistant professor level than at the professor level, particularly at IIT-Kanpur.

IIT-Kanpur has 957 sanctioned faculty positions, of which 376 are vacant, while IIT-BHU has 608 sanctioned positions and 234 vacancies. IIT-BHU said it follows a "flexi cadre system" for faculty positions and therefore category-wise sanctioned and vacant positions could not be calculated.

The information was provided in response to two separate RTI applications filed in January by Gowd Kiran Kumar, a Hyderabad resident. IIT-Kanpur issued its response on February 6, while IIT-BHU responded on February 24.

When contacted, IIT Kanpur Director Manindra Agrawal suggested the data was inaccurately contextualised.

"The information is imprecise and we will soon come out with a detailed response and facts and share it with the media," he told PTI.

Meanwhile, IIT BHU Public Relations Officer Utkarsh Shrivastava told PTI that the information was correct but added that he would be able to share any further information "tomorrow".

42 Civil Judges, 118 Assistant Professors Among 1,455 J&K Vacancies Awaiting Selection: RTI

Etvbharat: Muhammad Zulqarnain Zulfi : Srinagar: Friday, August 14, 2026.

The figures were revealed in reply to a Right to Information filed by journalist and RTI activist MM Shuja.

As many as 1,455 government posts are awaiting selection through the Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission (JKPSC), including 594 lecturer posts in the School Education Department, 90 posts under the Combined Competitive Examination-2024 and 118 assistant professor posts in government medical colleges, according to information released under the Right to Information Act.

The figures are part of an RTI response issued by the J&K Public Service Commission to journalist and RTI applicant Dr. M.M. Shuja. The application sought information about the commission's recruitment activity, staffing, finances, pending selections and court cases from August 2019 to August 2025.

The response, issued under Section 7 of the RTI Act, offers a snapshot of the recruitment workload before the commission and the number of selections that remained pending when the information was compiled.

The largest block of pending posts is in the School Education Department, with 594 lecturer positions awaiting selection across various disciplines.

The General Administration Department has 90 posts under CCE-2024 awaiting selection.

The Health and Medical Education Department accounts for several other significant groups. They include 107 assistant professor, lecturer and tutor posts at the Sher-i-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, 118 assistant professor posts in various government medical colleges, 37 medical officer posts in Ayurvedic and Homeopathic streams, 12 lady medical officer posts and 10 assistant professor nursing posts.

The list also includes seven assistant professor posts in pediatrics at Children's Hospital Bemina in Srinagar.

Other major pending selections include 65 prosecuting officer posts in the Home Department, 42 civil judge posts in the Law Department and 35 faculty posts in government Unani and Ayurvedic hospitals at Ganderbal and Akhnoor.

The Higher Education Department has 86 assistant professor posts pending across various disciplines. SKIMS has another 51 professor, tutor and lecturer posts on the list.

There are also 30 posts related to food technology and food processing, seven lecturer posts under the Skill Development Department, seven veterinary assistant surgeon posts and five district sericulture officer posts.

The pending list includes smaller groups of posts across the Home, Forest, Science and Technology, Housing and Urban Development, Agriculture Production, Geology and Mining, Law and other departments.

Among these are 80 posts for the Jammu and Kashmir Administrative Service notified in 2025, three assistant legal remembrancer and district litigation officer posts, four superintendent jail posts, one scientific officer post in chemistry and toxicology, one assistant engineer mining post and two assistant professor posts in food engineering and technology.

The RTI response also shows the scale of recruitment undertaken by the commission during the six-year period covered by the application.

According to documents enclosed with the response, the JKPSC notified 7,502 posts through 109 recruitment notifications between August 2019 and August 2025.

The notifications covered a wide range of government departments and positions. They included medical officers, assistant professors, lecturers, prosecutors, civil judges, faculty positions and administrative services.

Among the more recent recruitments were 19 lecturer posts in various disciplines in the School Education Department, 13 assistant professor and tutor posts, seven lecturer posts under the Skill Development Department, one scientific officer post, one superintendent jail post, 42 civil judge posts, 37 medical officer posts, three assistant legal remembrancer and district litigation officer posts and 80 JKAS posts.

The commission's own staffing position was also detailed in the RTI response.

It lists 97 employees appointed, working or deployed with the JKPSC. The list includes Chairman A.K. Choudhary, members Dr. Rajiv Singh and Asaf Mehmood Sagar, Secretary Bashir Ahmad Dar, the controller of examinations and other senior officers.

The staff list also includes additional secretaries, assistant legal remembrancers, under secretaries, section officers, stenographers, assistants, accountants, computer operators and other employees.

Junior secretariat assistants, press machinery staff, packers, jamadars, daftari and multi-tasking staff are also included. The response did not provide a separate numerical assessment of the staff shortage sought by the applicant.

The commission also disclosed details of its capital expenditure budget for six financial years.

Its approved capital expenditure budget from 2020-21 to 2025-26 totaled about 9.56 crore rupees, while expenditure recorded against it was about 3.51 crore rupees. In 2020-21, the approved capital expenditure budget was 2.0093 crore rupees and expenditure stood at 41.54 lakh rupees.

The approved budget in 2021-22 was 1.6518 crore rupees, against expenditure of 68.45 lakh rupees. For 2022-23, the approved budget was 1.70 crore rupees and expenditure was 59.45 lakh rupees.

Haryana to launch mega RTI training drive for 25k officials.

Hindustan Times: Chandigadh: Thursday, August 13, 2026.

The Haryana State Information Commission (HSIC) on Tuesday announced to launch a statewide programme to train 25,000 state public information officers (SPIOs) and first appellate authorities (FAAs), including 6,300 sarpanches functioning as SPIOs at the village level.

The year-long programme starting on August 12 is aimed at transforming the delivery of the Right to Information (RTI) regime in Haryana. It forms the centrepiece of a comprehensive package of administrative, technological and institutional reforms being undertaken by the commission to make the RTI mechanism faster, more transparent, accessible and citizen-centric.

Announcing the initiatives, Haryana’s chief information commissioner TVSN Prasad said the commission was undertaking a comprehensive overhaul of its functioning so that the RTI mechanism becomes more responsive to citizens and cases are disposed of with greater speed, efficiency and consistency.

Mega training programme

Prasad said the commission is embarking upon one of the most comprehensive RTI capacity-building programmes undertaken in the state, with the objective of training nearly 25,000 SPIOs and FAAs in one year. The programme will also cover around 6,300 sarpanches, who function as SPIOs at the village level.

The programme will combine online and offline modes of training to bring virtually the entire SPIO and FAA machinery of Haryana within a structured capacity-building framework.

The chief information commissioner said the objective of the programme is not merely to acquaint officers with the technical provisions of the RTI Act, but to develop a deeper understanding of the spirit, purpose and citizen-centric philosophy of legislation.

“The real objective of the RTI Act is to facilitate the flow of information to citizens. A culture of information-sharing has to replace a culture of information-denial. Our effort is to ensure that SPIOs understand not merely what information can be denied, but, more importantly, what information can and should be provided,” said Prasad.

For the programme, the Commission has collaborated with the Administrative Staff College of India (ASCI), Hyderabad, and the Haryana Institute of Public Administration (HIPA). The Commission will also seek expert assistance from renowned law schools.Strengthening the First Appellate Authority

The chief information commissioner said the Commission has identified the functioning of the First Appellate Authority as a crucial area requiring focused attention. The training programme will specifically seek to strengthen the first appellate mechanism so that grievances are effectively addressed at the departmental level itself, thereby reducing avoidable litigation and pendency before the State Information Commission.

The commission has observed that, in a number of cases, First Appellate Authorities have not been exercising their statutory powers to the extent envisaged under the RTI Act.

“The training will therefore focus on the role, responsibilities and adjudicatory functions of FAAs, including the need to pass appropriate and reasoned orders in accordance with the statutory framework,” Prasad said.

Another major reform will be the adoption of a 100% hybrid mode of hearing of RTI cases. The facility will enable appellants and respondents to participate in hearings without necessarily having to travel to the commission.

Taking another step towards digital accessibility, the commission will soon introduce e-filing of second appeals and complaints through its web portal. At present, the online facility is available for RTI applications and first appeals.

Vaishno Devi Medical College in Katra Loses MBBS Nod After Hindutva Protests Over Muslim Majority.

The Wire: Ankit Raj New Delhi: Thursday, August 13, 2026.

In January 2026, the NMC withdrew the permission from the Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Medical College, located in Jammu & Kashmir. However, in response to a query, the commission has said it possesses no specific document detailing the criteria to issue a warning versus altogether revoking permission.

On January 6, 2026, the National Medical Commission (NMC) withdrew permission to run the MBBS (Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery) program at the Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Institute of Medical Excellence (SMVDIME) in Katra, Jammu and Kashmir. 

The action was taken amid protests from Bharatiya Janata Party-supported Hindutva organisations against the high number of Muslim students enrolled at the medical college, even though all admissions had been based on National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) merit.

In its order, the commission cited serious deficiencies related to the faculty, the infrastructure and clinical facilities. However, a recent response to a Right to Information (RTI) application has brought to light fresh concerns regarding the NMC's modus operandi, especially actions against medical colleges.

In its RTI reply, the commission stated that its records do not contain any specific document outlining the criteria for determining when permission can be promptly revoked, as opposed to directions concerning when a show-cause notice, a warning or a chance to rectify deficiencies within a specified timeframe should be issued.

What information was sought in the RTI?

The RTI application was filed with the Medical Assessment and Rating Board (MARB) of the NMC on July 1, 2026. It sought a total of 14 items of information about inspections of medical colleges, the deficiencies identified and the regulatory measures implemented against them over the past three years.

The Wire Hindi was able to access the RTI application and its response through RTI activist Kanhaiya Kumar. The final three points of the application sought the following information:

Out of the colleges identified in Point 1, a list of colleges where the Letter of Permission/renewal of permission was withdrawn, suspended, or cancelled by MARB in the last 3 years, along with the specific deficiencies/grounds cited in each such case.

Out of the colleges identified in Point 1, a list of colleges where the inspection report recorded one or more deficiencies similar to those at Point 2 to 11 above, but where the Letter of Permission/ recognition was NOT withdrawn, suspended, or cancelled – along with the reasons/justification recorded by MARB for continuing recognition despite such deficiencies.

Copies of the specific guidelines/criteria followed by MARB to decide whether a given deficiency (or combination of deficiencies) results in withdrawal of permission versus a show-cause notice/ warning/ time-bound compliance direction.

Questions asked in the RTI application.

While disposing of the RTI application on July 2, 2026, the NMC refused to furnish nearly all of the requested information. Its response stated:

"The information sought is not maintained by the MARB in the manner sought in the RTI application. Under the Right to Information Act, 2005, the CPIO is required to provide only such information as is available and existing on the records of the public authority. The Act does not cast any obligation upon the CPIO to create information, compile or collate data from various records, or furnish information in the format desired by an applicant. Accordingly, the information sought cannot be provided.

With regard to Point No. 14 of the RTI application, it is informed that no such specific information/document, as sought, is available on the records of this CPIO. However, the applicant may refer to the National Medical Commission Act, 2019 and the regulations framed thereunder, which are available in the public domain."

In other words, the existence of any distinct criteria (as requested in the RTI) for cancelling permission has been denied.

The response is especially significant as decisions about granting, renewing or revoking permission for medical colleges directly impact the futures of lakhs of students.

What does the NMC Act say?

The NMC, in its response, advised referring to the NMC Act, 2019. A study of the Act reveals that Sections 26, 28 and 29 authorise the MARB to conduct inspections and assessments of medical colleges, as well as to grant or deny permission for the establishment of new medical colleges or courses.

The Act additionally specifies the general criteria to be taken into account while making decisions regarding permissions. Section 26(1)(f) of the Act states:

“The Medical Assessment and Rating Board shall take such measures, including issuing warning, imposition of monetary penalty, reducing intake or stoppage of admissions and recommending to the Commission for withdrawal of recognition, against a medical institution for failure to maintain the minimum essential standards specified by the Under-Graduate Medical Education Board or the Post-Graduate Medical Education Board, as the case may be, in accordance with the regulation made under this Act.”

However, the Act fails to offer a definitive list, or quantitative criteria, explicitly outlining the percentage of deficiency, the extent of infrastructural inadequacy or the specific circumstances under which permission can be immediately withdrawn.

Thus, even though the law empowers the commission to take action, there exists no distinct public "decision matrix" or comprehensive set of guidelines about choosing from among different possible courses of action. This is precisely the concern raised by the RTI application.

Controversies surrounding the medical college

The NMC's decision to withdraw permission for the SMVDIME came at a time when the medical college was embroiled in an intense communal controversy. In September 2025, NMC granted permission to SMVDIME to commence an MBBS program with a capacity of 50 seats. Note that Section 28 of the NMC states:

"No person shall establish a new medical college or start any postgraduate course or increase number of seats without obtaining prior permission of the MARB. The MARB shall, having due regard for the criteria specified in section 29, consider the scheme received under sub-section (2) and either approve or disapprove such scheme within a period of six months from the date of such receipt… Provided that before disapproving such scheme, an opportunity to rectify the defects, if any, shall be given to the person concerned." SMVDIME had achieved this significant milestone.

Subsequently, Jammu and Kashmir Board of Professional Entrance Examination published the merit-based admission list for the academic session 2025-2026. Of the 50 seats available, 42 were filled by Muslim students from Kashmir, seven by Hindu students and one by a Sikh student. All selections were made through NEET.

Nevertheless, soon after the release of the selection list, many Hindutva organisations started opposing the decision. They argued that the medical college was run by Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board, which derives its revenue from Hindu devotees' offerings from across the country. Therefore, a majority of the seats should be reserved for Hindu students.

On November 22, 2025, nearly 60 Hindutva organisations formed the Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Sangharsh Samiti, including various groups affiliated with Bajrang Dal, Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and BJP. Initially, they sought the cancellation of admissions to Muslim students. However, the movement subsequently escalated to a demand for the complete closure of the medical college.

The group held multiple demonstrations, staged dharnas (sit-ins) outside the college and also warned of Jammu bandh (close) and chakka jam (roadblock). Bajrang Bagra, the General Secretary of VHP, also addressed a letter to Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha regarding the "religious imbalance and protection of religious sentiments." BJP leaders met the Lieutenant Governor and Union health minister J.P. Nadda and informed him about the agitators' demands.

On January 2, 2026, the MARB team carried out a surprise inspection of the college. Four days later, on January 6, the NMC issued an order withdrawing permission granted to the college. Regarding the controversy over the high number of Muslim students in the medical college, Amulya Nidhi, national convenor of Jan Swasthya Abhiyan-India, questioned the number of students who had applied for admission, demanding information about their religious identities.

Speaking to The Wire Hindi, Nidhi said, “Did those who sparked this debate try to find out how many of the applicants for nomination were Hindus and how many were Muslims? If out of 100 children applying to that college on the basis of NEET merit, 80 to 90 were Muslims, then it is likely that the majority of them would be selected.” He went on to say, "In a medical college located in a tribal region such as Chhattisgarh, the number of tribal students is likely to be higher due to their larger population and more applications. Now, if someone questions why there are more seats allocated to tribal students in that college, it makes no sense. It is reasonable for tribal people to get more seats in tribal-dominated areas or in the medical colleges of the state, which is also valid." What shortcomings did the NMC cite? According to media reports, the commission noted that the college had 39% fewer teachers than the prescribed standards and the number of tutors, demonstrators and senior residents was lacking by 65%.

In addition to this, the inspection revealed that the number of patients visiting the OPD was recorded to be less than half of the prescribed standard. The hospital’s bed occupancy was found to be only 45%, as opposed to the mandated 80%. On an average, only about 50% of the beds in the intensive care unit (ICU) were found to be filled. NMC also said certain departments lacked practical and research labs and lecture theatres did not meet the required minimum standards. The library had only half of the prescribed number of books and there were only two journals accessible instead of the expected fifteen. The commission claimed there was a lack of facilities, such as sufficient operation theatres and separate wards for male and female patients. Due to these purported deficiencies, the NMC withdrew the college’s permission and instructed that all 50 students from the 2025-2026 batch be placed in supernumerary seats at other government medical colleges in J&K. In addition, it ordered the encashment of the institute’s performance bank guarantee amounting to Rs 15 crore. Allegations denied by the college Officials and faculty members from the institute raised serious concerns regarding the NMC's findings. 

They said the surprise inspection was carried out on January 2 during the winter break, a period when about 50% of the faculty was on leave. An official stated that the college received a phone call only 15 minutes prior to the arrival of the inspection team and efforts were made to contact the teachers who were on leave and ask them to return. Institute officials also challenged several statistics recorded in the NMC report. According to the Indian Express, an official asserted that the NMC documented 75 books and two journals in the library, while in reality, there were 2,713 books, 480 journals, 392 national e-journals and 9,900 foreign e-journals available there. Similarly, the institute claimed that there were eight operation theatres, as opposed to two recorded by the NMC. They also contested the finding regarding separate wards, saying that distinct rooms were available for indoor patients (those undergoing treatment). 

Certain officials and faculty members also alleged that the inspection team’s approach was pre-determined. According to them, the team had already made up its mind to withdraw the permission before even arriving at the campus. They linked this stance to the ongoing protests against the college. The Wire Hindi reached out to Yashpal Sharma, executive director of SMVDIME, to determine whether the deficiencies cited by the NMC for withdrawing the 'letter of permission' were indeed valid. Sharma responded, “See, if it said that there are deficiencies, we cannot claim otherwise. We cannot challenge the regulator's decision. …The decision to challenge it rests with the top authority (institute's board). No such decision has been taken from that level." When asked about why they did not contest the NMC's ruling, Sharma said, "We did not challenge it because we accepted it." Moreover, the organisation did not get a change to present its case before the NMC. "We were not even issued a notice. It was cancelled outright,” said Sharma. He added, "Many decisions are taken keeping multiple interests in mind. You are also aware that the circumstances were not normal at that time." ‘NMC's functioning is not transparent' Nidhi said the NMC has a prescribed procedure for granting approval to medical colleges. 

He explained that a team conducts an inspection of the college and permission is granted after evaluating all the necessary parameters. Regular monitoring is performed, which may happen periodically or in response to any complaints. He also questioned the decision to withdraw the permission based on the deficiencies pointed out by the NMC. Citing the example of Madhya Pradesh Professional Examination Board (MPPEB) Vyapam scam, he said, 'The Vyapam scam occurred in Madhya Pradesh, and the case is still going on. However, the medical colleges continue to operate. Why is the NMC not withdrawing the permission for those colleges until the case is resolved?

He demanded whether the license of any medical college ought to be cancelled due to the deficiencies pointed out. “A notice can be issued for a shortage of books, or an insufficient number of teachers, and ask for the identified deficiencies to be rectified within the stipulated time. This is the standard procedure,” he said. "Moreover, if the deficiencies were indeed so severe that the license needed to be withdrawn then the team which conducted the investigation and granted the letter of permission to the college should also be dismissed. Given that the permission was given only three or four months ago, how could such a serious deficiency arise in such a short time? Also, if permission was given despite the deficiencies, then the investigating team should be subject to scrutiny," said Nidhi. “If licenses have been cancelled on the basis of shortage of teachers, then the licenses of the majority of private medical colleges in the country should be revoked. 

What is the situation regarding faculty in government medical colleges? Let the government release the figures and everything will become clear," he arrested, while questioning if there were any complaints made by students against SMVDIME. Nidhi raised contentions about the selected day for the inspection as January 2, 2026, was a Friday and coincided with the birth anniversary of Prophet Mohammed. "Friday holds significant importance for Muslims. Jammu and Kashmir is a Muslim-dominated area, and it is possible that the teachers had gone to offer Namaz. Patients also avoid visiitng the hospital that day. In the afternoon, the atmosphere resembles a holiday due to the Friday prayers. More influx of patients is observed in the hospital on Sundays compared to Fridays," he said. 

He demanded the commission to release a list of inspections conducted over the last year and provide details about the same, a question that was also raised by Kumar in his RTI application. "The processes of NMC are not transparent, whether it pertains to granting permission, monitoring or revoking licences," said Nidhi, emphasising that medical colleges located in sensitive regions like Kashmir should be expanded rather than shut down. "Students in that area already face limited access to education. The number of educational institutions is insufficient. This is unethical," he said

It is noteworthy that shortly after the NMC's decision, many Hindutva organisations, including the Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Sangharsh Samiti, the Rashtriya Bajrang Dal and the Yuva Rajput Sabha, proclaimed it a victory, distributing sweets and holding celebrations across Jammu. Retired Colonel Sukhveer Singh Mankotia, who serves as the convener of the Sangharsh Committee, described the outcome as a success of his 45-day campaign and expressed his gratitude to Union health minister J.P. Nadda and the central leadership. 

BJP leaders also welcomed the NMC’s decision. J&K BJP president Sat Sharma said it was natural for any institution that failed to meet the NMC's standards to have its recognition revoked. BJP MLA R.S. Pathania called it "a step towards ensuring quality." Meanwhile, J&K chief minister Omar Abdullah criticised those celebrating the decision. He pointed out that other parts of the country were struggling to establish medical colleges, whereas, in Jammu, the closure of a medical college was being celebrated. He further demanded that on what basis was the permission granted to the college in the first place few months ago if it did not meet the standards and who would take responsibility of the supposed lapse

The first student to enrol at SMVDIME, also expressed displeasure over the celebration, "The closure of the college represents not only a loss for many students, but a huge setback for the entire Jammu and Kashmir region. A commendable new college had been established with excellent infrastructure. To celebrate after such a huge loss is shameful and pathetic."

When asked if the deficiencies cited by the NMC really exist, he replied, "No, it was nothing like that. If the same inspection which was done in this college is carried out regularly in other GMCs (Government Medical Colleges), then many GMCs will be closed. We are medical students, we know the conditions there (medical colleges)." Manit believes that SMVDIME was 'targeted.' Fresh questions raised on regulatory action The primary concern has shifted from merely assessing whether SMVDIME had deficiencies to understanding how the NMC determines whether to revoke permission or to allow an opportunity for improvement.

The RTI sought a copy of the specific guidelines or criteria for the same. However, the commission advised the applicant to refer to the NMC Act, 2019, instead. The 2019 Act empowers the MARB to inspect medical colleges, ensure compliance with the prescribed standards and, if necessary, take regulatory action such as issuing warnings, imposing fines, reducing or halting admissions and withdrawing permissions. 

However, there is no such public criterion that defines what specific action will be taken. Similarly, the Minimum Standard Requirements (MSR) regulations for medical colleges specify the required number of faculty members for a college with 50 seats, the number of hospital beds, the daily OPD patient load, the quantity of books and journals available in the library, as well as other essential infrastructure.

These regulations do not explicitly detail the repercussions of not achieving a particular standard – particularly, if such a shortfall would lead to immediate revocation or an opportunity for rectification. This is precisely why the RTI response prompted regulatory inquiry. In the absence of a separate public document, what grounds had been used to differentiate between the various types of actions taken against medical colleges, such as issuing show-cause notices, warnings, directives for time-bound compliance or the outright withdrawal of permission? To seek greater clarity, 

The Wire Hindi has emailed a list of detailed questions to Raghav Langer, the secretary of the NMC. This report will be updated if he responds. Translated from Hindi by Naushin Rehman. This article was originally published on The Wire Hindi.

This article went live on August twelfth, two thousand twenty six, at fifty-one minutes past five in the evening. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments

Rajarhat real estate project declared illegal.

Millenium Post: Thursday, August 13, 2026.

The Calcutta High Court has declared the “Aqua Golf Villa” real estate project at Rajarhat in North 24-Parganas illegal and unauthorised, directing the North 24-Parganas Zilla Parishad to initiate steps for its demolition within four weeks. Justice Suvra Ghosh passed the order on a writ petition filed by Ashley Brian Hyams, a retired ship-captain who had booked a villa in the project developed by M/s Greentech IT City Pvt. Ltd. Hyams had booked Villa AGV-19 in 2014 for Rs 1.5 crore and paid over Rs 78 lakh to the developer. 

Although possession was scheduled for November 2016, the villa was not handed over. Also Read - Bengal clears Bill to raise KMC wards to 209, Howrah to 68 He subsequently sought information under the Right to Information Act about the approvals obtained for the project.

The RTI responses, according to the petitioner, showed that the project lacked the required permissions from Chandpur Gram Panchayat, Rajarhat Panchayat Samiti and the North 24-Parganas Zilla Parishad. 

It was also not registered with the West Bengal Real Estate Regulatory Authority. An enquiry ordered by the Rajarhat Block Development Officer reportedly found that the developer could not produce documents establishing valid construction permission. The Chandpur Panchayat pradhan also stated that no permission had been issued for the project. 

The petitioner had further produced sanction plans and completion certificates allegedly used by the developer in proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal. An RTI response dated June 26, 2025, was cited to contend that the documents were not genuine.

NGO Funding Peaceful Protests Can't Be Ground To Deny Its FCRA Renewal: Kerala High Court.

Live Law: Kerala: Thursday, August 13, 2026.

The Kerala High Court recently came to the aid of two NGOs, whose FCRA renewal applications were rejected by the Centre relying on a report of the Central Security Agency (Intelligence Bureau) alleging that they 'funded' the protests at Vizhinjam Port. [2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 439]

It was alleged that one of the NGOs [Save A Family Plan India] transferred funds to another NGO named Trivandrum Social Service Society (TSSS), which in turn, diverted funds to SAKHI and SEWA, which allegedly funded the protests.

In the case of Kerala Social Service Forum, the allegation was that it was an official state level body of Kerala Catholic Church functioning under Kerala Catholic Bishops Council (KCBC), which had funded the protests.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas noted that there were no materials to show that NGOs had funded the protests, and added that even if they had, in fact, done so, that cannot be a ground to reject FCRA renewal:

“the report has not even identified any financial trail between the petitioner and any of the protestors directly…even if it is assumed that the petitioner had funded the peaceful protests, still, can it be held to be a reason to deny renewal of the certificate? The answer has to be in the negative. The right to protest is an integral part of a democracy. Every citizen has the right to demonstrate or to protest in a peaceful manner. The said right emanates from the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.”

It was further remarked that peaceful protest does not fall within the meaning of 'undesirable purpose' mentioned under Section 12(4)(a)(ii) of the FCRA:

“When the right to protest is constitutionally guaranteed, exercise of such rights cannot be labelled as 'an undesirable purpose' or against public interest… A peaceful protest against a project by persons who have a grievance or who apprehend injury to them, cannot be viewed as an 'undesirable purpose' due to a political disapproval. Executive or administrative distaste for protests or dissents, cannot convert the exercise of a constitutionally protected right into an 'undesirable purpose' or as against 'public interest'.”

The Court was considering petitions filed by the two NGOs, being aggrieved by the rejection of their FCRA renewal as well as the revisional order challenging the same.

The NGOs contended that they have been holding FCRA registration for decades without any violations and these have been renewed without any blemish till now. They took a stand that they never diverted any funds for supporting any protests and funds were only transferred to other FCRA-registered NGOs for welfare programmes. It was pointed out that no reasons were given for rejecting the renewal and they were not given an opportunity of hearing.

The Centre challenged the maintainability of the writ petition and pointed out that the right to receive foreign contribution is not a fundamental right. Since FCRA is a national security legislation and since foreign funding cannot be used any activity detrimental to national interests, which was done by the petitioners as revealed in the field inquiry, it was argued.

The Centre also took a stand that there was no statutory mandate to divulge reasons for rejection of renewal. When funds are diverted for 'undesirable purposes', the petitioners are entitled for renewal of their registration, it was argued. It also submitted that the petitioners cannot be told the reason for rejection and produced the Central Agency report in a sealed cover before the Court.

After hearing the parties, the Court observed that the order rejecting renewal of registration as per the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 cannot be 'cryptic' and must be reasoned.

“In a democratic country, governed by the rule of law, for rejecting an application, even if it is a renewal application for permission to receive foreign contribution, reasons are essential. An order without reason is an action born of whim and not of law. The right to be furnished with reasons is, undoubtedly, an indispensable part of a sound judicial system…There is not even a whisper about the clarifications given by the petitioner or as to how the petitioner can even be blamed for the alleged nature of use of the funds it transferred to another FCRA registered organization,” the Court opined.

Referring to Sections 16 [Renewal of certificate] and 12 [Grant of certificate of registration] of the FCRA, the Court remarked that the authority must record reasons for rejecting the renewal application, whether or not there was delay. It also said that merely quoting statutory provisions in the rejection order is not enough.

“the proviso to section 16(3) of the FCRA cannot be perceived as confined only to provide reasons for the delay. It would be quite preposterous to read the statute as laying down the principle that reasons must be given only for the delay and not when the application is rejected. The rights of the parties are affected not only when there is delay in considering the application for renewal, but also when the application is rejected. The very terminology used in the statute itself indicates that reasons have to justify rejection,” the Court added.

Moreover, even if there is no fundamental right to receive foreign funds and the permission to receive it is a regulatory mechanism, such a mechanism cannot ignore need to give reasons while rendering decisions, the Court opined.

The Court took note of the fact that the petitioners were not included in the list of NGOs involved in the protests and merely because the funds transferred by it were transmitted to another for funding the protests, that does not warrant denial of renewal against the petitioners.

It was also of the view that the report of the Central Security Agency does not reveal any material to claim a privilege under concerns of national security.

“there is no mandate that can be read into section 12(5) of the FCRA that merely because there is a report of a Central Security Agency, the reasons cannot be divulged or furnished. A contrary interpretation would lead to an anomalous and arbitrary situation wherein the statutory authority can pick and choose applicants for grant or renewal of certificate of registration and deny furnishing any reason, by merely referring to a report of a Central Security Agency,” the Court added.

The Court was of the view that there were no valid reasons for rejecting renewals and that the petitioners were entitled to have their registration renewed. Thus, it set aside the rejection and revision orders, and directed the authorities to pass fresh orders within 3 months.

In one of the judgments, it was clarified that till a decision in this regard was made, the petitioner's FCRA certificate would remain valid for enabling it to utilize the funds already received.

Case Nos: WP(C) No. 42996 of 2025 and WP(C) No. 43936 of 2025

Case Title: Save A Family Plan India v. Union of India and Ors. & Kerala Social Service Forum v. Union of India and Ors.  Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 439

Counsel for the petitioners: Karthika Maria, Santhosh Mathew (Sr.), Shinto Mathew Abraham, Arun Thomas, Veena Raveendran, Anil Sebastian Pulickel, Mathew Nevin Thomas, Kurian Antony Mathew, Karthik Rajagopal, Leah Rachel Ninan, Arun Joseph Mathew, Noel Ninan Ninan, Adeen Nazar, Aparnna S., Rohan Mathew

Counsel for the respondents: Harikumar G. Nair - Sr. CGC, K. Jayesh Mohankumar

Click to Read/Download Judgment in WP(C) No. 42996 of 2025

Click to Read/Download Judgment in WP(C) No. 43936 of 2025