Central Information Commission
Ganesh K Barapatre vs Supreme Court Of India on 13 March, 2018
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Baba Gang Nath Marg,
Munirka, New Delhi -110067
Tel : +91-11-26186535
Appeal No. CIC/SCOFI/A/2017/143136
Appellant: Sh. Ganesh K. Barapatre,
Respondent: Central Public Information Officer
Addl. Registrar,
Supreme Court of India,
Tilak Marg, Mandi House,
New Delhi - 110201.
Date of Hearing: 09.03.2018
Date of Decision: 09.03.2018
ORDER
Facts:
1. The appellant filed RTI application dated 5.1.2017 seeking copy of consent letter of party Shri Ganesh K. Barapatre in respect of SLP No. 33474 of 2013 (Ganesh K. Barapatre Vs. RBI) filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court Legal Services committee, New Delhi and was fixed for 5th National Lok Adalat on Saturday 11th April, 2015.
2. The response of CPIO is not on record. The appellant filed first appeal on 20.02.2017 with the First Appellate Authority (FAA). The FAA responded on 21.03.2017. The appellant filed second appeal on 12.05.2017 with the Commission on the ground that information should be provided to him.
Hearing:
3. The appellant's representative participated in the hearing through video conferencing. The respondent participated in the hearing personally alongwith Mr. Deepak Goel, Advocate and Mr. Brahma Singh CPIO, Supreme Court Legal Services Committee.
4. The appellant's representative stated that the appellant Mr. Ganesh K. Barapatre had not given any consent letter to participate in the Lok Adalat.
He enquired as to how SLP No. 33474 of 2013 had been filed/fixed before 1 the 5th National Lok Adalat on 11.4.2015. The appellant's representative further stated that copy of appellant's consent letter in SLP No.33474 of 2013 filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court Legal Services Committee should be provided to the appellant.
5. The respondent stated that the CPIO, Supreme Court Legal Services Committee vide letter dated 11.4.2017 informed the appellant that matter was listed before the Supreme Court Lok Adalat on 11.4.2015 (item No.2, Lok Adalat No.2) on the basis of the consent dated 1.4.2015 received from both parties' advocates, which reads as under:
"Both parties are agree to settle the matter in Lok Adalat."
6. The respondent stated that they had complied with both the CIC and FAA's order.
7. The appellant's representative stated appropriate order should be passed so that he can approach the appropriate court. Discussion/Observation:
8. The requisite information has been provided to the appellant. It appears that there was possibly a gap in communication in this matter between the appellant and his advocate.
9. The appellant is free to approach the appropriate forum, if he wishes to challenge this matter.
Decision:
10. No further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.
The appeal is disposed of. Copy of the decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Radha Krishna Mathur) Chief Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (S.C. Sharma) Dy. Registrar 2