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 1]

Central Information Commission

Mr. Vijay Kumar Yadav vs High Court on 17 June, 2013

                     Central Information Commission, New Delhi
                             File No.CIC/SM/A/2013/000088
                  Right to Information Act­2005­Under Section  (19)




Date of hearing                         :                                         17/06/2013


Date of decision                        :                                         17/06/2013



Name of the Appellant                   :    Sh. Vijay Kumar Yadav,
                                             S/o Sh. Chandrma Prasad Yadav, B­199,
                                             Gali No. 6, Katariya Road, Prem Nagar­2,
                                             Kirari Suleman Nagar, Delhi ­ 86


Name of the Public Authority            :    Central Public Information Officer,
                                             Patna High Court Legal Services
                                             Committee,
                                             High Court Building, Patna ­ 800 001



        The Appellant was not present in spite of notice.

        On behalf of the Respondent, Shri Ravindra Kumar Sinha was present.

Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra

2. We heard the submissions of the Respondent.

3. Referring to a representation he had sent earlier regarding the working  of   the   electricity   department,   the   Appellant   had   wanted   to   know   about   the  progress made on that representation till now. The CPIO had informed him that  his   representation   had   been   forwarded   to   the   Secretary  of   the   Bihar  State  Electricity Board for installing a transformer and that he should now approach  CIC/SM/A/2013/000088 the Board to find out about the further progress in the matter. Not satisfied with  this reply, he had preferred an appeal, but, it appears, the Appellate Authority  had passed no order.

4. During the hearing, the Respondent submitted that the representation  received from the Appellant had no connection with the High Court and, even  then, the Chairman of the Committee had, with a view to helping the petitioner,  forwarded the  representation to the  State  Electricity  Board.  He argued  that,  obviously, they would not be in a position to provide any information on what  action had been taken on the representation by the Electricity Board authorities.  We   entirely   agree   with   this.   In   the   first   place,   the   subject   matter   of   the  representation   has   no   connection   to   the   High   Court   or   its   Legal   Services  Committee.   Therefore,   the   Appellant   must   find   out   about   the   fate   of   his  representation from the authorities concerned rather than seeking any further  information from the Patna High Court Legal Services Committee.

5. There is, thus, no merit in the appeal. It 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/2013/000088