Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mr. Anil Bajirao Badgujar vs Supreme Court Of India on 6 March, 2013

                       Central Information Commission, New Delhi
                             File No.CIC/SM/A/2012/001031
                  Right to Information Act­2005­Under Section  (19)




Date of hearing                         :                                       6 March 2013


Date of decision                        :                                       6 March 2013



Name of the Appellant                   :    Shri Anil Bajirao Badgujar,
                                             S/o. Bajirao Dipchand Badgujar,
                                             Gandhipura Mainroad, Erandol,
                                             Distt - Jalgaon - 425 109.


Name of the Public Authority            :    CPIO, Supreme Court of India,
                                             New Delhi.



        The Appellant was present.

        On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present;­
        (i)      Smt. Smita Vats Sharma, CPIO,
        (ii)     Ms. Sania Husaini, Advocate,
        (iii)    Shri Rajesh Inamdar, Advocate



Chief Information Commissioner                   :        Shri Satyananda Mishra



2. The   Appellant   was   present   in   the   Jalgaon   studio   of   the   NIC.   The  Respondents were present in our chamber. We heard all their submissions.

3. In   his   RTI   application,   the   Appellant   had   wanted   to   know   about   the  action taken on a petition he had filed before the Supreme Court. The CPIO  had informed him that his petition had been received and decided to be filed as  CIC/SM/A/2012/001031 it   was   found   not   to   be   covered   under   the   PIL   guidelines.   The   Appellate  Authority had approved this decision.

4. During the hearing, the Appellant submitted that he had a lot of hope  from the Supreme Court and was rather surprised that his petition had been  filed. He demanded that the orders by which his petition was filed should be  provided to him. We see no difficulty in disclosing this information. We direct the  CPIO to write to the Appellant within 10 working days of receiving this order and  to provide to him the photocopy of the orders/ file noting dated 12 May 2011  relating to the decision of the Registrar to file this particular petition.

5. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.

6. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.

(Satyananda Mishra) Chief Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy.  Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against  application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this  Commission.

(Vijay Bhalla) Deputy Registrar CIC/SM/A/2012/001031