2009 (8) TMI 1256

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o.1, who had filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Act for short), in spite of service. The writ petition is accordingly taken up for hearing and final disposal. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by Mr. Vivek Mittal for setting aside order dated 28th November, 2006 passed by the Chief Information Commissioner imposing penalty of ₹ 5,250/- for delay in supp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lect documents from the concerned officers and handover the same to the CPIO/Administrative Officer (Central Zone). Thus, the two class-IV officials were working under and assisting the CPIO i.e. the Administrative Officer (Central Zone). 5. There is merit in the finding of learned Chief Information Commissioner that a CPIO cannot escape his obligations and duties by stating that persons appointe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d an inquiry as per the directions of the Deputy Commissioner (Central Zone). He was not responsible for the delay in furnishing the information sought by the respondent No.1. The impugned order, therefore, is based upon a wrong assumption that the petitioner was the CPIO, who was responsible for the delay in furnishing the information. It may also be noted that no opportunity or notice was issued .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X