Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (1.07 seconds)

Cen.Pub.Information Officer,Sci & Anr vs Subhash Chandra Agarwal on 26 November, 2010

3. The application on the above said point was transferred to CPIO under Section 6(3) of the Act. By an order dated 02.02.2011, CPIO rejected the said application on the ground that the information as sought for by the respondent is personal information and is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the Act and in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Central Public Information Officer, SCI & Anr. v. Subhash Chandra Agarwal: Civil Appeal No.10044/2010, decided on 26.11.2010, there is a stay on the disclosure of the information relating to the judges. The respondent preferred an appeal (No.47/2011) before the First Appellate Authority (hereafter 'FAA') challenging the order dated 02.02.2011. By an order dated 07.03.2011, FAA dismissed the appeal.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 11 - B S Reddy - Full Document

Centrlal Board Of Sec.Education & Anr vs Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors on 9 August, 2011

9. Apparently, the CIC has passed the impugned order in exercise of powers under Section 19(8)(a)(iv) of the Act, as explained by the Supreme W.P.(C) No. 1842/ 2012 Page 5 of 8 Court in Aditya Bandhopadhyay (supra). The power under Section 19(8)(a)(iv) of the Act is to ensure compliance with Section 4(1)(a) of the Act. Section 4(1)(a) of the Act reads as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 36 - Cited by 8906 - R V Raveendran - Full Document
1