Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.24 seconds)State(Govt Of Nct Of Delhi) vs Rajinder Prasad Sharma on 2 December, 2014
"35. At this juncture, it is necessary to clear some misconceptions about
the RTI Act. The RTI Act provides access to all information that is available and
existing.........A public authority is also not required to furnish information which
require drawing of inferences and/or making of assumptions. It is also not
required to provide `advice' or `opinion' to an applicant, nor required to obtain
and furnish any `opinion' or `advice' to an applicant. The reference to `opinion'
or `advice' in the definition of `information' in section 2(f) of the Act, only refers
to such material available in the records of the public authority. Many public
authorities have, as a public relation exercise, provide advice, guidance and
opinion to the citizens. But that is purely voluntary and should not be confused
with any obligation under the RTI Act." (Emphasis Supplied)
Similarly, with respect to the jurisdiction of the Commission under the RTI Act,
reference may be had of a judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the matter
of Govt. of NCT of Delhi vs. Rajender Prasad (W.P.[C] 10676/2016) dated
30.11.2017 wherein it was held as under:
Union Of India vs This Review Petition Having Come Up For ... on 26 February, 2014
While, the Apex Court in the matter of Union of India vs Namit Sharma (Review
Petition [C] No.2309 of 2012) dated 03.09.2013 observed as under:
Section 12 in The Right to Information Act, 2005 [Entire Act]
1