AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sanjib Banerjee, J.—The State is not represented despite service and despite subsequent reminders. The grievance of the petitioner is that the State Information Commissioner has not dealt with petitioner''s appeal u/s 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 within the period prescribed under the statute.
In a number of matters the same grievance has been carried to this jurisdiction. The State Information Commission is represented and it is submitted that there are three State Information Commissioners at the moment but the volume of work is beyond the capability of three Commissioners.
It is necessary that the State Government looks into the desirability of appointing more State Information Commissioners if the present volume of work justifies the same.
W.P. No. 11464 (W) of 2013 is disposed of by requesting the State Information Commissioner to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner on February 25, 2013 as expeditiously as the business of the Commission would permit and, preferably, within six weeks from date.
It is submitted by the petitioner that after the institution of the petition, some information has been supplied by the District Inspector of Schools, Primary Education, Howrah but all the information sought has not been supplied.
It will be open to the petitioner to confine the petitioner''s appeal before the State Information Commission to the extent of the information not supplied by the relevant person.
There will be no Order as to costs. Urgent certified photocopies of this Order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of the requisite formalities.