Bangalore Mirror: Bangalore: Saturday, 30 July 2022.
The Karnataka High Court has said that Karnataka Information Commission, a statutory quasi-judicial body, cannot act like a king or an emperor as its functions are of public law character.
Justice Krishna S Dixit, while hearing the writ petition no. 4913 of 2022 filed by Sijo Sebastain, has imposed a penalty of Rs 25,000 on the respondent under Section 20 of the Right to Information Act and also awarded a cost of Rs 10,000 to the petitioner.
“This levy needs to be discharged by Sri Shankar personally from his pocket. He shall remit the penalty amount along with costs to the petitioner within a period of 30 days. The delay will carry interest at the rate of 2 per cent per mensem for the first 30 days and 3 per cent for the days next following,’’ the judge said.
This pertains to one Sijo Sebastain seeking information from the Public Information Officer of Block Education Office, South Circle-4, Govt High School Compound, Triveni Nagar, KR Puram, on a private school on November 4, 2019. However, the Public Information Officer did not provide information to Sijo Sebastain even after he filed the first appeal on December 19, 2019. With no information from the Public Information Officer, the petitioner was compelled to approach the State Information Commission on February 1, 2020.
“I received the data on the private school only on November 20, 2021. The State Information Commission, which heard my petition on November 26, 2021, closed the case when the respondent informed the Commission that he provided the information by a registered post. The State Information Commission did not impose a penalty on the Public Information Officer for the delay in providing the information. The Registry shall immediately send by Speed Post a copy of this judgment to the Karnataka Information Commission,’’ said Sijo Sebastain. He said that he filed a petition in the High Court on February 28, 2022, seeking justice.
Judgement hailed
Describing the High Court judgment as the best judgment, BH Veeresh of Mahiti Hakku Adhyayana Kendra said that some of the information commissioners have been lenient towards the Public Information Officers.
“The High Court judgment is a boost for those who seek information from the government under the RTI Act,’’ he said.
S Amaresh, an Right to Information activist, said the quantum of penalty for not providing information on time should be increased. “The authorities concerned should recommend demotion of such officials who fail to provide information to the applicants on time. It will make all Public Information Officers work hard to provide information to the applicants on time,’’ he said.
The Karnataka High Court has said that Karnataka Information Commission, a statutory quasi-judicial body, cannot act like a king or an emperor as its functions are of public law character.
Justice Krishna S Dixit, while hearing the writ petition no. 4913 of 2022 filed by Sijo Sebastain, has imposed a penalty of Rs 25,000 on the respondent under Section 20 of the Right to Information Act and also awarded a cost of Rs 10,000 to the petitioner.
“This levy needs to be discharged by Sri Shankar personally from his pocket. He shall remit the penalty amount along with costs to the petitioner within a period of 30 days. The delay will carry interest at the rate of 2 per cent per mensem for the first 30 days and 3 per cent for the days next following,’’ the judge said.
This pertains to one Sijo Sebastain seeking information from the Public Information Officer of Block Education Office, South Circle-4, Govt High School Compound, Triveni Nagar, KR Puram, on a private school on November 4, 2019. However, the Public Information Officer did not provide information to Sijo Sebastain even after he filed the first appeal on December 19, 2019. With no information from the Public Information Officer, the petitioner was compelled to approach the State Information Commission on February 1, 2020.
“I received the data on the private school only on November 20, 2021. The State Information Commission, which heard my petition on November 26, 2021, closed the case when the respondent informed the Commission that he provided the information by a registered post. The State Information Commission did not impose a penalty on the Public Information Officer for the delay in providing the information. The Registry shall immediately send by Speed Post a copy of this judgment to the Karnataka Information Commission,’’ said Sijo Sebastain. He said that he filed a petition in the High Court on February 28, 2022, seeking justice.
Judgement hailed
Describing the High Court judgment as the best judgment, BH Veeresh of Mahiti Hakku Adhyayana Kendra said that some of the information commissioners have been lenient towards the Public Information Officers.
“The High Court judgment is a boost for those who seek information from the government under the RTI Act,’’ he said.
S Amaresh, an Right to Information activist, said the quantum of penalty for not providing information on time should be increased. “The authorities concerned should recommend demotion of such officials who fail to provide information to the applicants on time. It will make all Public Information Officers work hard to provide information to the applicants on time,’’ he said.
.JPG)
.JPG)
