Case Law Details
Rajesh Kumar Patel S/o Shri Ramsharan Vs Chief Information Commission (Chhattisgarh High Court)
Admittedly, in this case, up till the filing of the second appeal, no information was supplied, however, the information when was supplied i.e. the copy of the cash-book, the petitioner contended that one copy was supplied twice. The commission therefore, on such examining the fact has directed to supply the certified copy of the cash-book. The days rolled by and eventually the final satisfaction arrived on 03.02.2011. Admittedly, there is considerable delay of about 23 months. The statutory requirement under sub-section (1) of Section 20, the legislation has used the word ‘shall’ for imposing penalty. However, the outer limit has been fixed of Rs.25000/-. In this case since the delay has been caused of about 23 months, as a result, the respondents No.2 & 3 would be required to pay penalty of Rs.25000/-, which may be imposed under sub-section (1) of Section 20 of the Act, 2005. In a result, it is directed that since the information was not provided as per the requirement of the statute, the respondent No.3 would be required to pay an amount of Rs.25000/- which shall be deposited with the treasury within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER / JUDGMENT
1. Heard.
2. The present petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
