Tapabrata Chakraborty,J. - (1.) The present writ petition has been preferred primarily praying for the following relief: - 'b) A Writ of and/or the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent authorities concerned and/or their men, servants, agents and/or assigns to forthwith cancel and/or withdraw and/or set aside and/or quash and/or rescind the impugned disciplinary proceeding and the impugned charge sheet issued vide Memo No.PU/711/DISC/469 dated 26.07.2019 and the show cause notice vide Memo No.PU/711/DISC/317 dated 17.06.2019;' Records reveal that the petitioner submitted an application under Section 6 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (in short, RTI Act) on 14th May, 2018 primarily seeking information as to whether the revenue internally generated by the Indian Statistical Institute (in short, ISI) during previous financial year was deducted while releasing grants-in-aid. Being dissatisfied with the order passed in the said application, the petitioner preferred a first appeal on 25th July, 2018. On 11th September, 2018 the petitioner submitted a request to the First Appellate Authority (in short, FAA) for allowing him inspection of documents. By a letter dated 17th September, 2018 the petitioner was requested on behalf of the authorities of ISI to inform a date subject to his convenience to inspect the documents on or after 22nd October, 2018. Thereafter on 25th September, 2018 the petitioner preferred a second appeal before the Central Information Commission (in short, CIC) which was disposed of by an order dated 31st October, 2018 directing the authorities of ISI 'to facilitate inspection of records on information sought in point no.4 on 02.11.2018 at 3:00PM and provide certified copies of documents selected, upon payment of requisite fee'. Thereafter, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 17th June, 2019 by the respondent n.2 followed by a charge-sheet dated 22nd July, 2019. For resolution of the dispute, a date was fixed but such conciliation failed, as would be explicit from the memo dated 9th January, 2020 issued by the respondent no.2 annexed at page 179 of the writ petition.
(2.) Mr. Bose, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that there had been no misrepresentation of facts in the petitioner's letter dated 22nd October, 2018 submitted to CIC. Upon considering the contents of the said letter, the second appeal was disposed of by an order dated 31st October, 2018. For having preferred the statutory appeal under the provisions of the RTI Act the authorities of ISI could not have initiated the disciplinary proceeding. The petitioner has exercised his right in terms of the RTI Act and has availed the remedies as provided under the said Act. Such act cannot be construed to be a misconduct and as such the disciplinary proceeding cannot survive.
(3.) He submits that from the contents of the charge sheet and the document annexed at page 179 of the writ petition, it would be explicit that the disciplinary authority had made up its mind and had already formed an opinion to impose penalty upon the petitioner.;