Rajesh Bindal J. - (1.) The petitioner-Bhakra Beas Management Board (for short, 'the Board') has approached this court challenging the order dated 17.7.2012, passed by Central Information Commission (for short, 'the Commission'), whereby in an appeal filed by Jivan Dass (respondent No. 2), a direction has been given for grant of some benefits to Joginder Singh (respondent No. 3).
(2.) Briefly, the facts are that respondent No. 2- Jivan Dass filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short, 'the Act'), which was received by Public Information Officer on 7.6.2011. It was pertaining to house rent allowance admissible to the employees of the Board. Vide communication dated 2.8.2011, the information sought by respondent No. 2 was furnished. Dissatisfied with the information supplied, respondent No. 2 preferred an appeal before the appellate authority. Even before the appellate authority, the information was again supplied. The stand of the petitioner- Board is that respondent No. 3, namely, Joginder Singh, who is presently working as Deputy Superintendent in the Department of Irrigation, State of Haryana, had also sought similar information. He had served the Board on deputation from 26.8.2009 to 29.2.2012. House rent allowance was not admissible to respondent No. 3 for the reason that there was Government accommodation available at the place of posting of respondent No. 3, which he failed to occupy. After respondent No. 3 was repatriated to his parent department, he filed CWP No. 4436 of 2012 in this court seeking a direction to the Board to decide his claim for refixation of pay and house rent allowance. The same was disposed of on 12.3.2012 with a direction for disposal of his representation, which was disposed of on 8.6.2012. In fact, Jivan Dass has no cause of action to apply for information, as was sought under the Act. It was a kind of proxy litigation on behalf of respondent No. 3. Despite complete information having been furnished to Jivan Dass, he still preferred an appeal before the Commission. On the date fixed, i.e., 17.7.2012, Jivan Dass himself did not appear but Joginder Singh appeared on his behalf on the same day and an order was passed by the Commission directing that Joginder Singh will file his application with regard to house rent allowance, which shall be processed as per rules and payment shall be made within a period of six weeks. It is the aforesaid order, which is impugned before this court.
(3.) Learned counsel for the Board submitted that the order passed by the Commission is totally beyond its jurisdiction. The Commission has conducted itself in the manner as if it was exercising the jurisdiction of High Court. The issue before the Commission, which could be taken up and decided was as to whether the information sought by Jivan Dass had been provided or not, but still a direction was given for processing the application of Joginder Singh for grant of house rent allowance. For the same relief, he had even filed a writ petition in this court, which was disposed of. In terms of the directions given by this court, the order was passed by the competent authority declining his claim.;