Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.72 seconds)

S.A.S.Alaudeen vs The Chairperson on 26 July, 2023

“5. As can be seen from the language used in the main part of Sub-Section 4, it states that nothing contained in this Act shall apply to such intelligence and security organisation. Thus, in the first part, two entities are mentioned in singular as organisation. Subsequently, they are referred as 'organisations' established by the State Government. If intelligence and security organiation was only one, there was no need to use the plural term 'organisations' subsequently. It clearly indicates that such an organisation can be for intelligence purpose or for security purpose. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 13/20 14 W.P.(MD)NO.22789 OF 2017 The word "and' between the two words intelligence and security organisation will have to be read as "or". Therefore, the second submission of Mr. Radhakrishnan cannot be accepted.” ” A recent decision reported in (2023) 3 MLJ 420 (V.Vidya V. State Chief Commissioner) is on the same lines. It was held that the exemption granted under Section 24 of the Act is circumscribed by excluding information relating to corruption and human right violations, placing such situations on a higher pedestal.

S.A.S.Alaudeen vs The Chairperson on 26 July, 2023

“5. As can be seen from the language used in the main part of Sub-Section 4, it states that nothing contained in this Act shall apply to such intelligence and security organisation. Thus, in the first part, two entities are mentioned in singular as organisation. Subsequently, they are referred as 'organisations' established by the State Government. If intelligence and security organiation was only one, there was no need to use the plural term 'organisations' subsequently. It clearly indicates that such an organisation can be for intelligence purpose or for security purpose. The word "and' between the two words intelligence and security organisation will have to be read as "or". Therefore, the second submission of Mr. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 13/20 14 W.P.(MD)NO.22789 OF 2017 Radhakrishnan cannot be accepted.” ” A recent decision reported in (2023) 3 MLJ 420 (V.Vidya V. State Chief Commissioner) is on the same lines. It was held that the exemption granted under Section 24 of the Act is circumscribed by excluding information relating to corruption and human right violations, placing such situations on a higher pedestal.

S.A.S.Alaudeen vs The Chairperson on 26 July, 2023

“5. As can be seen from the language used in the main part of Sub-Section 4, it states that nothing contained in this Act shall apply to such intelligence and security organisation. Thus, in the first part, two entities are mentioned in singular as organisation. Subsequently, they are referred as 'organisations' established by the State Government. If intelligence and security organiation was only one, there was no need to use the plural term 'organisations' subsequently. It clearly indicates that such an organisation can be for intelligence purpose or for security purpose. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 13/20 14 W.P.(MD)NO.22789 OF 2017 The word "and' between the two words intelligence and security organisation will have to be read as "or". Therefore, the second submission of Mr. Radhakrishnan cannot be accepted.” ” A recent decision reported in (2023) 3 MLJ 420 (V.Vidya V. State Chief Commissioner) is on the same lines. It was held that the exemption granted under Section 24 of the Act is circumscribed by excluding information relating to corruption and human right violations, placing such situations on a higher pedestal.
1