Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 26 views

    Decision 2006 2 S.C.agrawal

    Uploaded by

    Satish Mishra
    The document summarizes an appeal hearing at the Central Information Commission regarding requests for information filed by Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal to the Lok Sabha Secretariat and Rajya Sabha Secretariat. The appellant had sought information related to petitions he had previously submitted regarding a complaint against a Delhi High Court judge and on the subject of judicial reforms. Both Secretariats responded that they had no direct role in the matters, which related to constitutional provisions and the Ministry of Law. The Commission dismissed the appeals, finding that the requested information had been provided and that it did not have the authority to address grievances or direct administrative action. However, the appellant's petition was forwarded to the Union Law Minister's office per his request.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Decision 2006 2 S.C.agrawal

    Uploaded by

    Satish Mishra
    26 views3 pages
    The document summarizes an appeal hearing at the Central Information Commission regarding requests for information filed by Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal to the Lok Sabha Secretariat and Rajya Sabha Secretariat. The appellant had sought information related to petitions he had previously submitted regarding a complaint against a Delhi High Court judge and on the subject of judicial reforms. Both Secretariats responded that they had no direct role in the matters, which related to constitutional provisions and the Ministry of Law. The Commission dismissed the appeals, finding that the requested information had been provided and that it did not have the authority to address grievances or direct administrative action. However, the appellant's petition was forwarded to the Union Law Minister's office per his request.

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes an appeal hearing at the Central Information Commission regarding requests for information filed by Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal to the Lok Sabha Secretariat and Rajya Sabha Secretariat. The appellant had sought information related to petitions he had previously submitted regarding a complaint against a Delhi High Court judge and on the subject of judicial reforms. Both Secretariats responded that they had no direct role in the matters, which related to constitutional provisions and the Ministry of Law. The Commission dismissed the appeals, finding that the requested information had been provided and that it did not have the authority to address grievances or direct administrative action. However, the appellant's petition was forwarded to the Union Law Minister's office per his request.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    26 views3 pages

    Decision 2006 2 S.C.agrawal

    Uploaded by

    Satish Mishra
    The document summarizes an appeal hearing at the Central Information Commission regarding requests for information filed by Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal to the Lok Sabha Secretariat and Rajya Sabha Secretariat. The appellant had sought information related to petitions he had previously submitted regarding a complaint against a Delhi High Court judge and on the subject of judicial reforms. Both Secretariats responded that they had no direct role in the matters, which related to constitutional provisions and the Ministry of Law. The Commission dismissed the appeals, finding that the requested information had been provided and that it did not have the authority to address grievances or direct administrative action. However, the appellant's petition was forwarded to the Union Law Minister's office per his request.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 3

    CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal No.

    CIC/WB/A/2006/00257-58 Right to Information Act 2005 Section 19 Appellant: Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal

    Respondent: Lok Sabha Secretariat / Rajya Sabha Secretariat Facts: On 30.2.06 and 18.2.06 respectively appellant Shri Agrawal applied to Shri Deepak Mahna, CAPIO, Lok Sabha and Shri Deepak Goyal, CPIO, Rajya Sabha referring to petitions dated 6.11.05 till 9.11.05 addressed to Honble Speaker and Honble Chairperson of the above two public authorities regarding his complaint against a Judge of the Delhi High Court. He asked for status of these petitions under provisions of RTI as also complete details and noting on file movement, for which he was ready to pay the appropriate fee. In his application to PIO Shri Deepak Goyal, he also referred to the status of his letters of the same date on the subject of judicial reforms. To his application to the CPIO Lok Sabha, the

    appellant Shri Agrawal received a response on 16.2.06 in which it was indicated to him that his petitions were found to be not actionable. He, therefore, made an appeal to Shri S.K.Verma, Addl. Secretary, and Appellate Authority on 20.2.06 pleading that a copy of his appeal be placed before the Speaker, Lok Sabha. Shri Deepak Goyal, CPIO Rajya Sabha on the other hand replied that, this Secretariat has no direct role in both the matters addressed therein. As regards the removal of a judge of the High Court, I am to inform you that the Constitution of India prescribes a specific procedure there under in Articles 124 and 217 which contemplate action on the part of both the Houses of Parliament as well as the President of India. Similarly your second petition, which relates to judicial reforms, concerns the Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs. You may, therefore, write to that Ministry. Against this decision, the appellant Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal moved an appeal to Shri N.C.Joshi, Addl. Secretary, Rajya Sabha, and Appellate Authority on 5.4.06, who found appellants request unacceptable, since

    constitutional provisions governing removal of a Judge in the High Court and the subject of Judicial Reforms did not give a direct role to the Rajya Sabha Secretariat. The two cases being from the same appellant and concerning the

    same matter in two Houses of the same Parliament, these have been clubbed together for hearing.

    The matter was heard on 8.9.2006. The followings are present:1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal Shri P.K.Grover, CPIO Lok Sabha Sh. Deepak Mahna, CAPIO, Lok Sabha Sh. Harish Chander, AD(IC) Lok Sabha Sh. N.C.Joshi, Addl.Secy., Rajya Sabha Sh.Deepak Goyal, CPIO & Director, Rajya Sabha

    The appellant presented his counter/reply to the comments received from both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha Secretariats in response to the appeal notice issued by this commission. This emphasizes the grievance redress sought Appellant Shri

    through the applications rather than any information denied.

    Agrawal has also argued in this counter reply that in many decisions, the Commission has not differentiated information from action to be taken, and should do so now. DECISION NOTICE It is clear from the response received by the appellant that the information sought on his specific question as to what action has been taken on his earlier petitions by the Honble authorities, has indeed been provided. Insofar as

    decisions of this Commission are concerned, these call for action only in relation to supply of information, not for grievance redress of an administrative nature. That is beyond purview of this Commission. I, therefore, find that both the petitions are without substance and these are dismissed. However, appellant has prayed that his petition presented in this hearing may be forwarded to appropriate authority in

    Government.

    Petition may, therefore, be forwarded to the Office of the Union

    Minister, Law & Justice for the attention of the Minister.

    Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.

    (Wajahat Habibullah) Chief Information Commissioner 8.9.2006

    Authenticated true copy.

    Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against

    application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.

    (L.C.Singhi) Addl. Registrar 8.9.2006

    You might also like