9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 922X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the information sought for by the petitioner clearly reveals that the petitioner has tried to make a roving enquiry and for supply of those materials, which are not to be disclosed in view of the provisions contained under clause (i) of Section 8 (1) of the Right to Information Act. Therefore, the Public Information Officer rejected his claim, which has been confirmed by the first appellate authority as well as the second appellate authority. This Court is of the considered view that no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the authority in passing the orders impugned under Annexures-4, 5 and 6. Accordingly, the writ petition merits no consideration and the same is hereby dismissed. - Dr. Justice B.R. Sarangi And Mr. Justice G. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Court. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court finds that the petitioner has filed an application under the Right to Information Act to get the following information:- Kindly provide me the following information pertaining to my Tax- Evasion Petition against Mr. Harmohan Sarangi Mr. Himanshu Sarangi (sent to office vide Speed Post ref. R08002098781N dt. 26.08.2017. 1. The daily progress made on my application TEP dt. 30.08.2017 to till date. Kindly provide a copy of preliminary assessments/ investigation. 2. Recorded Reasons for delay in taking action on my application. 3. Names and designations of officials who have considered my application and the number of days it was laying wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion petition against Harmohan Sarangi and Himansu Sarangi (sent to office vide speed post ref:R08002098781N dated 06.08.2017). But such information, in any way, do not indicate that the petitioner has made a query and sought for information with regard to disclosure of broad outcome of tax evasion petition under Annexure-2. Rather, the information sought for by the petitioner clearly reveals that the petitioner has tried to make a roving enquiry and for supply of those materials, which are not to be disclosed in view of the provisions contained under clause (i) of Section 8 (1) of the Right to Information Act. Therefore, the Public Information Officer rejected his claim, which has been confirmed by the first appellate authority as well as t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
