Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.65 seconds)Section 6 in The Right to Information Act, 2005 [Entire Act]
Union Of India vs Namit Sharma on 3 September, 2013
The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Union of India v. Namit Sharma in REVIEW
PETITION [C] No.2309 OF 2012 IN Writ Petition [C] No.210 OF 2012 with State of Rajasthan and
Anr. vs. Namit Sharma Review Petition [C] No.2675 OF 2012 In Writ Petition [C] No.210 OF 2012
had held as under:
Hansi Rawat & Anr. vs Punjab National Bank & Ors. on 11 January, 2013
Furthermore, the High Court of Delhi in the matter of Hansi Rawat and Anr. vs. Punjab National
Bank and Ors. LPA No.785/2012 dated 11.01.2013 held as under:
Shobha Vijender vs Chief Information Commissioner & Ors on 29 November, 2017
A similar view delineating the scope of the Commission's jurisdiction was also taken by the Hon'ble
High Court of Delhi in Sher Singh Rawat vs. Chief Information Commissioner and Ors., W.P. (C)
5220/2017 and CM No. 22184/2017 dated 29.08.2017 and in the matter of Shobha Vijender vs. Chief
Information Commissioner W.P. (C) No. 8289/2016 and CM 34297/2016 dated 29.11.2017.
[[
DECISION:
Centrlal Board Of Sec.Education & Anr vs Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors on 9 August, 2011
In this context a reference was made to the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in 2011 (8) SCC 497
(CBSE and Anr. Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay and Ors), wherein it was held as under:
Section 12 in The Right to Information Act, 2005 [Entire Act]
Section 18 in The Right to Information Act, 2005 [Entire Act]
Section 25 in The Right to Information Act, 2005 [Entire Act]
Mr.Triveni Prasad Bahuguna vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India on 6 September, 2012
The Commission also observed that the framework of the RTI Act, 2005 restricts the jurisdiction of
the Commission to provide a ruling on the issues pertaining to access/ right to information and to
venture into the merits of a case or redressal of grievance. The Commission in a plethora of decisions
including Shri Vikram Singh v. Delhi Police, North East District, CIC/SS/A/2011/001615 dated
17.02.2012 Sh. Triveni Prasad Bahuguna vs. LIC of India, Lucknow CIC/DS/A/2012/000906 dated
06.09.2012, Mr. H. K. Bansal vs. CPIO & GM (OP), MTNL CIC/LS/A/2011/000982/BS/1786 dated
29.01.2013 had held that RTI Act was not the proper law for redressal of grievances/disputes.
1