Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.29 seconds)Mr.Ramesh Chand Jain vs Dtc, Gnct Delhi on 24 June, 2011
15. The Appellant expressed ignorance of the averred earlier order and quickly started
submitting against the reliance placed by Respondent No.1 on the CIC decision in the
matter of Mr. Ramesh Chand Jain Vs DTC in a number of their replies to the RTI
Applications to emphasize on the principle of res judicata applicable to the Appellant's
cases. The Appellant sought to argue that the said principle is a matter of civil
jurisprudence and not applicable to criminal cases as he is fighting a criminal case and
that tomorrow he will be attending some litigation hearing which involves two former
benches of the Commission. Further, he harped on some 1800 pages of documentary
evidence submitted by him/uploaded by him. It was also his contention that in today's
cause list, the cases are not listed in a manner that he had desired i.e the recently filed
cases are listed later while the ones filed earlier are listed in the beginning and these
earlier and later cases are interconnected etc. The bench noted the incoherence of the
Appellant's submissions as well as his apparent refusal to acknowledge the previously
decided case and informed him that his case-wise submissions will be considered
eventually.
The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs Cen.Information Commr.& Ors on 3 October, 2012
2. Copy of memo issued to third party are qualified to be personal information as
defined in clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act (Girish Ramchandra
Deshpande vs. Central Information Commission & ors. SLP(C) No. 27734 of
2012 dated 03/10/2012). In view of the above, the requested information related
to personal information, disclosure of which has no relationship to any public
activity or interest, hence information cannot be provided under Section 8 (1)(j)
of the RTI Act."
Shri K.L. Bablani vs Directorate General Of Vigilance, ... on 16 September, 2009
िब दु स.ं 1(b) का जवाब: A file noting in this regard cannot be provided in view of the
decision of CIC in the matter of K.L. Bablani Vs. DG Vigilance, Customs & Central
Excise bearing appeal No. CIC/AT/A/2009/0617 (Date of Decision:16.09.2009), wherein
it was held that "Confidentiality of note-files, therefore, is an entirely wholesome
principle conducive to good governance. Any compromise with objectivity in processing
matters extant in the file, is potentially damaging to governance by exposing those
entrusted with the charge of processing the matter to, undue, and sometimes,
intimidating, scrutiny by interested parties."
Section 8 in The Right to Information Act, 2005 [Entire Act]
The Public Records Act, 1993
1