Central Information Commission
Shankar R. Kattimani (Advocate) vs Bar Council Of India on 14 November, 2024
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/BCOIN/A/2023/142239
Shri SHANKAR R. KATTIMANI (Advocate) ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Bar Council of India
Date of Hearing : 12.11.2024
Date of Decision : 12.11.2024
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 03.06.2023
PIO replied on : 07.07.2023
First Appeal filed on : 20.07.2023
First Appellate Order on : 11.09.2023
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 13.10.2023
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 03.06.2023 seeking information on following points:-
"Under the aegis of the ministry of law & justice, the bar council of India has constituted 'Bhartiya bhasha Samiti chaired by the former Chief justice of India, Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.A. Bobde. The committee is developing a common core Vocabulary close to all Indian languages for the purpose of translating legal material into regional languages I want know that committee work has done or not, is about any document is available please give me about information under RTI I am requesting."
The CPIO, Bar Council of India vide letter dated 07.07.2023 replied as under:-
"........I would like to inform you that the meeting of the "Bhartiya Bhasha Samiti was held on 19.03.2023 and the Committee has made a recommendation to the Ministry of Law & Justice in consultation with the Bar Council of India, Ministry of Education and UGC to produce legal textbooks/ reference Page 1 books/study material in Indian languages and to promote Indian language medium of instruction in addition to English medium in Legal Education The Committee also recommends to develop of vocabulary necessary for uses of regional languages in each state. These are the recommendation of Committee to the Union Ministry of Law and Justice."
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 20.07.2023. The FAA vide order dated 11.09.2023 stated as under:-
"From the perusal of the appeal dated 20.07.2023 is preferred by Mr. Shankar R.Kattimani under Section 19 of the Right to information Act, 2005 against the reply dated 07.07.2023 of Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Bar Council of India on the ground that CPIO of Bar Council of India has failed to provide complete and correct information in response to his RTI application dated 03.06.2023. I have call for the documents relating to RTI application and reply sent by the CPIO. On bare perusal of the documents and reply of the RTI application, it reveals that the CPIO has supplied complete and correct information to the appellant. In view of the above the present appeal is disposed of."
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Written submission dated 04.11.2024 has been received from the CPIO and same has been taken on record for perusal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Present through video-conferencing.
Respondent: Mr. Ashok Kr. Pandey, Jt Secretary/PIO- participated in the hearing.
The Appellant stated that the relevant information has not been furnished by the PIO till date. He requested to direct the PIO to furnish the information as sought.
The Respondent stated that the relevant information has been duly provided to the Appellant within stipulated time frame. He stated that information with respect to Bhartiya Bhasha Samiti as available in their official record has been duly furnished to the Appellant Decision:
At the outset, Commission directs the concerned PIO to furnish a copy of their latest written submission along with annexures if any, to the RTI Applicant, free Page 2 of cost via speed-post and via e-mail, within 07 days from the date of receipt of this order and accordingly, compliance report be sent to the Commission.
Upon perusal of records and submissions made during hearing, it is noted that the Appellant's queries had been appropriately answered by concerned PIO. Furthermore, written submission filed by the Respondent is comprehensive and self-explanatory. Thus, information as permissible under the provisions of the RTI Act has been duly furnished to the Appellant. In the given circumstances, no further intervention of the Commission is warranted in this case under the RTI Act.
Appeal is disposed off accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)