Specific Notice Under RTI Act Mandatory Before Imposing Penalty On Public Information Officer: Chhattisgarh High Court
https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/punjab-and-haryana-high-court/punjab-haryana-high-court-right-to-information-act-cryptic-orders-directions-236017
The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that the State Information Commission cannot treat an earlier notice issued during appeal proceedings as a "final notice" for the purpose of imposing a penalty under Section 20(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. The Court observed that before imposing a penalty upon a Public Information Officer, the Commission must issue a specific notice under Section 20(1) and afford an adequate opportunity of hearing in accordance with the statutory mandate.
Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad was hearing a writ petition filed by a Public Information Officer challenging the order passed by the Chhattisgarh State Information Commission imposing a penalty under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act and recommending disciplinary action under Section 20(2). The dispute arose after respondent No.4 sought information regarding the auction or disposal of unserviceable items purchased under the Skill Development Scheme. The petitioner replied that the information sought was voluminous and insufficiently specific. Although the First Appellate Authority directed the petitioner to furnish the information free of cost within fifteen days, the information seeker preferred a second appeal before the State Information Commission, which ultimately imposed the penalty.
The petitioner contended that no notice under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act had been issued before the penalty was imposed. It was argued that the Commission had erroneously treated the earlier notice issued in the second appeal proceedings as the final notice contemplated under Section 20(1). The State Information Commission and the information seeker contended that once the petitioner had already been issued notice during the appeal proceedings and had failed to comply with the order of the First Appellate Authority, no separate notice before imposition of penalty was necessary.
The Court examined Section 20(1) of the RTI Act and observed that the provision mandates that before imposing a penalty, the concerned Public Information Officer must be afforded an adequate opportunity of hearing. It held that where the statute prescribes a particular procedure, the authorities are bound to follow it in its letter and spirit and cannot substitute or dispense with the prescribed procedure.
The Court found that the State Information Commission had expressly treated the earlier notice issued during the appeal proceedings as the final notice under Section 20(1), which was contrary to the statutory requirement. It held that an appeal notice cannot be equated with the specific notice required before imposing a penalty under Section 20(1).
“State Commission has categorically stated that earlier notice has been issued to the petitioner and as such it would be treated as final notice under Section 20(1) of the R.T.I. Act, which in the considered opinion of this Court is not in accordance with law,” the Court observed.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the order dated 06.09.2022 passed by the Chhattisgarh State Information Commission imposing a penalty upon the petitioner.
Case Title: Amarchand Pahare v. Chhattisgarh State Information Commission & Ors. [WPC No. 4714 of 2022].