Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Vijaykumar Namdeo Kakade, filed a writ petition challenging two orders dated 25.07.2013 and 15.10.2013 passed by the Chief Information Commissioner, Mumbai. The background reveals that on 05.10.2010, the Chief Information Commissioner had allowed the petitioner's appeal and directed the respondent institution (Godavari College of Engineering) to supply information sought under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The institution challenged this order by filing Writ Petition No.11699 of 2010 before the Bombay High Court, which remained pending until 02.08.2013. While that writ petition was pending, the petitioner approached the Information Commissioner complaining of non-compliance. The Chief Information Commissioner, instead of merely enforcing compliance, passed the impugned orders which effectively recalled or reviewed the earlier order of his predecessor. The High Court noted that this was improper because the earlier order was already under challenge before the court. The court held that the Chief Information Commissioner is not expected to recall or review an order when a proceeding challenging that order is pending before the High Court. The court set aside the impugned orders and restored the earlier order dated 05.10.2010, directing the institution to supply the information sought by the petitioner within four weeks.
Headnote
A) Right to Information Act - Review/Recall of Orders - Jurisdiction of Information Commissioner - Chief Information Commissioner cannot recall or review an order passed by his predecessor when a writ petition challenging that order is pending before the High Court - Held that such action is improper and amounts to interference with the court's proceedings (Paras 4-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Chief Information Commissioner can recall or review an order made by his predecessor when a writ petition challenging that order is pending before the High Court.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the orders dated 25.07.2013 and 15.10.2013 passed by the Chief Information Commissioner, and restored the order dated 05.10.2010. The respondent institution was directed to supply the information sought by the petitioner within four weeks.
Law Points
- Information Commissioner cannot review or recall own order when challenge to that order is pending before High Court
- Right to information under RTI Act
- 2005
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (03) 12
Writ Petition No. 1200 of 2014
Mr. V.P. Patil for petitioner, Mr. S.N. Morampalle for respondent No.1, Mr. L.V. Sangit for respondent Nos.2 and 3
State of Maharashtra, The President, Godavari Foundation, Godavari College of Engineering
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging orders of Chief Information Commissioner recalling earlier order directing supply of information under RTI Act.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of orders dated 25.07.2013 and 15.10.2013 passed by Chief Information Commissioner and restoration of earlier order dated 05.10.2010.
Filing Reason
Chief Information Commissioner recalled his predecessor's order while a writ petition challenging that order was pending before the High Court.
Previous Decisions
Chief Information Commissioner allowed appeal on 05.10.2010 directing supply of information; institution challenged it in WP No.11699/2010; while that was pending, Commissioner passed impugned orders recalling earlier order.
Issues
Whether the Chief Information Commissioner can recall or review an order made by his predecessor when a writ petition challenging that order is pending before the High Court.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the impugned orders were passed without jurisdiction as the earlier order was sub judice before the High Court.
Respondents argued that the Commissioner had power to review its own orders.
Ratio Decidendi
The Chief Information Commissioner is not expected to recall or review an order when a proceeding challenging that order is pending before the High Court. Such action is improper and amounts to interference with the court's proceedings.
Judgment Excerpts
This Court holds that the Chief Information Commissioner is not expected to recall or review the order when any proceeding is pending in this Court in which there is challenge to the order itself made by the Chief Information Commissioner.
Procedural History
On 05.10.2010, Chief Information Commissioner allowed petitioner's appeal and directed supply of information. Institution challenged this in WP No.11699/2010 (pending till 02.08.2013). While that was pending, petitioner complained of non-compliance; Commissioner passed orders on 25.07.2013 and 15.10.2013 recalling earlier order. Petitioner filed WP No.1200/2014 challenging those orders.
Acts & Sections
- Right to Information Act, 2005:
