KALI RAM Vs. STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER-CUM-DEPUTY EXCISE & TAXATION COMMISSIONER
LAWS(HRCDRC)-2013-10-5
HARYANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on October 09,2013

KALI RAM Appellant
VERSUS
State Public Information Officer -Cum -Deputy Excise And Taxation Commissioner Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.M.KANTIKAR,PRESIDING MEMBER - (1.) THE Complainant, Kali Ram, was a Clerk at Check Post Sikanderpur, Gurgaon under the office of Deputy Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Gurgaon. During his service in the year 1989 -90, his Deputy Commissioner recorded some adverse remarks in his Annual Confidential Report (ACR). The complainant made representation against it but it was unheard. Therefore, he sought information from the Public Information Officer (PIO) of the respondent by an application filed under RTI Act, 2005 but the PIO did not furnish the required information within 30 days and supplied incomplete information after lapse of 28 days thereafter. Therefore, alleging deficiency in service on the part of PIO of opposite party, the complainant filed a complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Gurgaon (in short, District Forum) seeking compensation of Rs.2,00,000/ - and sought directions for complete information. The opposite party appeared before the District Forum and stressed upon their point of non -maintainability of such complaint. The District Forum allowed the complaint and held liable the opposite party for deficiency in service and ordered compensation of Rs.5,000/ - and Rs.3,000/ - as litigation charges to be paid within 30 days.
(2.) AGGRIEVED by this order of District Forum, the opposite party filed an appeal before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana (in short State Commission).
(3.) IT was vehemently argued by the opposite party before the State Commission that as there is provision for filing appeal under the RTI Act, the complainant filed an appeal before the State PIO of the opposite party. The said appeal was dismissed by appellate authority. The State Commission relying upon the law laid down by Honble Supreme Court in the case of Khanapuram Gandaiah vs. Administrative Officer and Ors. wherein it was held that the remedy for a party aggrieved against the order of the Public Information Officer lies in a challenge by way of appeal, revision or any other legally permissible mode, allowed the appeal.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.