Ms. Vibha Singhal vs Chief Information Commissioner And Another

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J

The petitioner before this Court is a primary school teacher, who at the time of filing of present writ petitions was teaching in Government Primary School, Dandedi, Khwajgipur, Block Roorkee, District Haridwar. Certain informations were sought by one Smt. Sumanlata Upadhyaya as to whether the present petitioner is qualified to be appointed as a primary school teacher. Not satisfied with the information furnished to her, she ultimately approached the State Information Commission.

The State Information Commission vide two different orders dated 03.12.2015 24.02.2016, inter alia, directed the Chief Education Officer to constitute an inquiry against the petitioner and to find out as to whether she has secured appointment as primary school teacher on the basis of forged and fabricated documents.

The document which has been alleged by the complainant to be forged and fabricated is the original resident certificate of the petitioner, whereas the case of the petitioner is that she was born in the territory of Uttarakhand.

In any case, the crucial question is whether the Commission has power under Section 18 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 to direct the authorities to constitute an inquiry and more important question would be whether the order of the Commission can be treated as direction.

The powers of the State Information Commission are given under Section 18 of the Right to Information Act, 2005, which read as under:-

"18. Powers and functions of Information Commission. -(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, it shall be the duty of the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission as the case may be to receive and inquire into a complaint from any person,-

(a) who has been unable to submit a request to a Central Public Information Officer, or State Public Information Officer as the case may be, either by reason that no such officer has been appointed under this Act, or because the Central Assistant Public Information Officer or State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has refused to accept his or her application for information or appeal under this Act for forwarding the same to the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer or Senior Officer specified in sub-section

(1) of section 19 or the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be;

(b) who has been refused access to any information requested under this Act;

(c) who has not been given a response to a request for information or access to information within the time limits specified under this Act;

(d) who has been required to pay an amount of fee which he or she considers unreasonable;

(e) who believes that he or she has been given incomplete, misleading or false information under this Act; and

(f) in respect of any other matter relating to requesting or obtaining access to records under this Act.

(2) Where the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to inquire into the matter, it may initiate an inquiry in respect thereof.

(3) The Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be shall, while inquiring into any matter under this section, have the same powers as are vested in a civil court while trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in respect of the following matters, namely:-

(a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of persons and compel them to give oral or written evidence on oath and to produce the documents or things;

(b) requiring the discovery and inspection of documents;

(c) receiving evidence on affidavit;

(d) requisitioning any public record or copies thereof from any court or office;

(e) issuing summons for examination of witnesses or documents; and

(f) any other matter which may be prescribed.

(4) Notwithstanding anything inconsistent contained in any other Act of Parliament, or the State Legislature, as the case may be, the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may, during the inquiry of any complaint under this Act, examine any record to which this Act applies which is under the control of the public authority, and no such record may be withheld from it on any grounds."

In none of the above provisions, and nothing has been shown to the contrary before this Court that the Commission has power to give directions to constitute an inquiry. Therefore, to that extent the order of the State Information Commissioner is not proper. However, considering the fact that the State Information Commissioner is a statutory authority under the law, the direction given by the State Government should at least be considered as an advice and in case the Chief Education Officer comes to the conclusion that there is a substance in the matter, he can act upon such direction.

With these observations, writ petitions stand disposed of.

The learned Standing Counsel Mr. S.R. Joshi shall apprise the concerned Chief Education Officer about the fate of the writ petitions. Let a copy of this order be given free of cost to the Learned Standing Counsel for onward compliance.