---------------------- PRESS NOTE ---------------------- Engineering Professor turned RTI Activist Kawaldeep Singh from Patiala has made a representation before the First Appellate Authority, District and Sessions Judge, Patiala in two of the First Appeal matters u/s 19 of the RTI Act filed by him against the replies of the Public Information Officer of the same office in regard to the of information asked via respective RTI Applications related to the Implementation of orders of (1) Supreme Court of India in "Shreya Singhal Vs. Union of India" declaring section 66-A of IT Act, 2000 as unconstitutional and thus null and (2) High Court of Punjab and Haryana in "Ravinder @ Binder Vs. State of Haryana" for not framing charges on basis of Incomplete Challans / Chargesheets and for initiating contemptuous proceedings against the Judicial Officers who are violating these orders. * PIO had wrongfully denied information in both of these cases in written reply saying no information is available in the matter in compiled form, which was strongly opposed in today's hearing of First Appeal. * Sessions Judge asked, "Why are you asking this information and what is your interest in this matter and who are you to ask this information?" To which it was replied that though there is no provision in the RTI Act by which an applicant could be questioned about the reason of asking information from a Public Authority, but still as a reply, this information is asked in larger public interest for the cause of number of accused (innocents until proven guilty) are languishing in jails due to non implementation of these order; and the appellant is the citizen of India empowered under RTI Act to ask this or any other information available with this office. * Sessions Judge again pointed as you are not affected by this information then this is a third party information so couldn't be provided, which again was strongly opposed saying that this information is related to the implementation of orders of Supreme Court and High Court from administrative side and records in regard to same, so not a third party information along with not related to any personal information of any person or individual but Court Records on both administrative and judicial sides. * PIO / Superintendent said he is not prepared with the arguments. * The appellant Kawaldeep Singh submitted that from his end he has given his arguments in complete, and nothing more is to be added, so the First Appellate Authority may write its order based upon the records available.
by अहं सत्य
Join at
Facebook
No comments:
Post a Comment