Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the right to information act 2005 Court: delhi Page 1 of about 17,043 results (0.204 seconds)

Oct 29 2007 (HC)

Mr. Sunil Bansal Vs. Respondent: Bharat Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. and anr. ...

Court : Delhi

..... is also has been clarified by the ministry of shipping, road transport and highways, government of india in reply to the clarification sought under right to information act, 2005 vide no. rt- 23018/2007-t dated 20th june 2007.14. that as per the above provisions a vehicle having national permit can ..... proposed operation under the aforesaid tender vide its letter dated 25.6.2007. the transport department in its reply dated 6th of july 2007 informed the petitioner that since the proposed operation was to be carried out between two states, the conditions which apply to trucks which operate on ..... c.m. no. 10716/07 for recall of the order dated 31.7.2007, whereby this court had directed that 'without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, the evaluation process of the bids, including that of the bid of the petitioner, may go on.'18. it ..... chennai, bangalore. hyderabad including secundrabad, ahmedabad, pune, surat, kanpur and agra in respect of four wheeled vehicles manufactured on the from 1st april 2005, except in respect of four wheeled transport vehicles plying on inter-state permits or national permits or all india tourist permit within the jurisdiction of ..... permit and haryana road permit (as applicable for haryana).4. insurances5. complying with euro iii mass emission norms (trucks manufactured after 01.04.2005).7. bidders were also required to submit registration certificate/certificate of fitness/route permits of their trucks/copy of invoice or any supporting documents .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 11 2012 (HC)

Union of India Vs. Central Information Commission and Another

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2012(3)KLT52(SN)(C.No.52)

..... the constitution of india has been claimed by the government, for production of those documents; (2) that in terms of section 8(1) (a) of the right to information act, 2005, the information asked for by you, the disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of india, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the state etc. ..... c.ramesh v. minister of personnel and grievance and pensionis set aside. the application of the respondent no.2 under section 6 of the right to information act, 2005 dated 7th november, 2005 is also dismissed, holding that the respondent no.2 is not entitled for the correspondence sought by him which was exchanged between the president and the ..... decide whether larger public interest would require disclosure of the documents in question or not 32. the above observation of respondent no.1 is legally not tenable. right to information act, 2005 which was enacted by the legislature under the powers given under the constitution of india cannot abrogate, amend, modify or change the bar under article 74(2) ..... the same are also privileged. according to the petitioner since the correspondences are privileged, therefore, it enjoys the immunity from disclosure, even in proceedings initiated under the right to information act, 2005. 7. the petitioner further contended that by virtue of article 361 of the constitution of india the deliberations between the prime minister and the president enjoy complete immunity .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 03 2011 (HC)

B S Mathur Vs. Public Information Officer of Delhi High Court

Court : Delhi

..... (cic) dismissing his appeal against an order dated 28th april 2010 of the appellate authority of the high court of delhi under the right to information act, 2005 (rti act) declining to furnish the complete information sought by him in rti application no. 184 of 2008. 2. in writ petition (civil) 608 of 2011 the petitioner challenges the same order insofar as it relates to the ..... by the petitioner to the extent not supplied to him yet would "impede the investigation" in terms of section 8 (1) (h) of the right to information act, 2005. on this specific aspect mr. bansal, learned counsel for the respondent states that the matter will be considered once again and a decision taken within three weeks." 18. at the ..... . a learned judge of the high court was appointed as the inquiry officer. 4. on 19th august 2008, the petitioner filed an application no. 143 of 2008 under the rti act seeking the following information: (i) copy of directions of committee of honble inspecting judges allowing registrar (vig.) to scrutinise personal file of applicant containing intimations supplied under the conduct rules. (ii) copy ..... by him could not be supplied as "the same is exempt under section 8 (1) (h) of the rti act read with rule 5 (b) of the delhi high court (right to information) rules, 2006" (hereinafter the rules). 6. aggrieved by the above decision, the petitioner filed appeal no. 21 of 2008 which was dismissed by the appellate authority on 31st october 2008. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 24 2011 (HC)

S K Sachdeva and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... test, an overall qualifying mark and a weightage system was prescribed by ail. as will be discussed hereafter, this fact emerged much later when the petitioners sought information under the right to information act, 2005 (`rti act).6. the petitioners state that although the written test was held on 29th june 2003, the results were not declared thereafter. on 8th july 2003, a representation ..... was no overall qualifying mark indicated either. nothing was said about the weightage to be given to the written test, group discussion or the interview.22. through information obtained under the rti act it transpired that in a letter dated 6th may 2003 written by the director (hrd) to the director (security) it was stated that the institute of banking ..... irrational.10. counter affidavits have been filed by ail as well as the private respondents. additional affidavits have been filed by the petitioners placing on record information obtained by them through the rti act. pursuant to the deliberations in court, ail has placed charts which will be discussed hereafter. the parties also filed their respective written submissions after the ..... (c) no. 733 of 2007 is the same but is by certain other employees who obtained further relevant information under the rti act. the grounds of challenge are that the procedure disclosed at the time of issuance of the staff notice and information handout was not followed by ail. moreover, the excessive weightage of 70% given to group discussion and interview .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 2012 (HC)

M.S. Frank Vs. Delhi University and Others

Court : Delhi

..... june, 2009 to sh. ashish joshi j-8-1, ms flats, sector-13, r.k.puram, new delhi-110066. subject: original application (oa) no.496 of 2009 under the right to information act, 2005. wp(c) 12422/2009 page 19 of 31 sir, in continuation of this office letter of even no. dated 5th may, 2009, the following points are clarified: *point(c) of ..... of principal in all colleges are required to possess the qualification requirements. (xiii) on 24th april, 2009, rti applicant informed respondent no.2 via e-mail along with other relevant documents attached thereto that as per the information received under the right to information act, 2005 respondent no.1 has not yet approved the appointment of respondent no.5 as principal. (xiv) independently on 27th april ..... to start such general courses. therefore, keeping in view the recommendations made by the expert committee, approved by the competent authority, this is to inform you that the ph.d. is a degree specified by the ugc under section 22 of the ugc act, 1956. accordingly, the allahabad agriculture institute, allahabad, a deemed to be university under section 3 of the ugc ..... it wants to as it has the right to do so. subsequently, the commission also issued clarification vide d.o. letter no.f.6-1(ii)/2006 (cpp-i) dated 15th july, 2006 regarding starting of courses of study leading to award of degrees as specified and notified under section 22(3) of the ugc act, 1956, in which it was clarified .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 29 2011 (HC)

Nalini Prabhakar Vs. University of Delhi and anr

Court : Delhi

..... affidavit on 26 th february 2010. she placed on record the response received by her from respondent no. 2 to her application under the right to information act, 2005 (rti act) furnishing her the extracts of minutes of the meeting of the mc held on 10 april, 2003. the mc in the said minutes ..... could not apply for appointment on a regular basis to a permanent post. 21. ms. soni, learned counsel for the respondents was unable to inform this court when exactly this process of restructuring, which began sometime in october 1996, would come to an end. it seems unreasonable that on ..... 2001, the teacher in-charge of the department (english) made a strong recommendation for regularization of the services of the petitioner. the in-charge informed the principal that the petitioner had worked in the department for more than five years and had performed her duties "efficiently and with a rare ..... affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondents on 17th september, 2010 stating that "due to typographical mistake (copy paste) and oversight some incorrect information has come on affidavit, i.e., in para 6 of the affidavit it has inadvertently been stated that there was no existing sanctioned post and ..... dated 6th november 2008 of respondent no. 2 in reply to an application under the rti act confirming that nine posts were lying vacant in the department of english. in another response, respondent no. 2 informed the petitioner that nearly 10 posts had fallen vacant in the department of english since 1st .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 23 2011 (HC)

K.S.R. Chari Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... submissions drew the attention of the court to the replies received to certain queries raised by the petitioner by way of the application under the right to information act, 2005 (rti act). mr. mukherjee submitted that it was not sufficient for the ncdc to have communicated just once to the petitioner by way of a ..... , even those who had earlier decided to continue in the srpf. secondly, the responses to the applications under the rti act make it abundantly clear that the petitioner was not informed of the subsequent extensions of time for giving the option. the affidavit filed on behalf of the ccl also shows ..... from the place of his employment and is located over thousands of miles away in his post-retirement days is unlikely to come across the information concerning the revision of pensionary benefits or the extension of time for exercising options unless it is specifically brought to his notice. the petitioner ..... the petitioner on record together with an affidavit dated 6th november 2009. in particular reference to the petitioner, a query was raised whether he was informed of the circulars issued by the railway board regarding the liberalized fps issued between 1976 and 1981. the answer to this query read as under ..... been clarified by the ccl in response to the queries under the rti act as well as in a separate affidavit filed on behalf of the ccl that there are no records to show that the petitioner was in fact informed of the extension of dates for exercising option for rp/fps. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 03 2011 (HC)

Shambhu Dayal Sharma Vs. Mcd and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... of mayor of the mcd. 3. the petitioner relies on the replies to the queries under the right to information act, 2005 informing that, the respondent no.4 joined as reader in law w.e.f. 8th april, 2005 and was as on 5th may, 2011 working in law centre-ii, faculty of law, university ..... . union of india air 1967 sc 1889 held that though origin of employment in government is contractual but once appointed, acquires a status and rights and obligations are no longer determined by consent of parties but by statute or statutory rules. for this reason also, an employee of the ..... the first report of joint committee of the 14th lok sabha on offices of profit laid in lok sabha and rajya sabha on 13th december, 2005 (the supreme court in consumer education and research society had recorded that since recommendation of bhargava committee report in november, 1955, a constitutional ..... has been defined as the government of national capital territory of delhi. the said definition is of no help. similarly, the general clauses act, 1897 also in section 3(23) defines government as including both central government and state government. significantly, holding an office of profit under mcd ( ..... to be government or central government. the question for determination thus is, whether employment with delhi university is employment with government. 14. the dmc act till the amendment with effect from 1 st october, 1993 did not in section 2 define "government"; with effect from the said date, government .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 30 2012 (HC)

VipIn Kumar Vs. Union of India and Another

Court : Delhi

..... for the review medical examination board, however, the review medical examination board did not declare the result and did not inform the petitioner about the result. 7. the petitioner further averred that he filed an application under the right to information act, 2005 however, in reply to the same it was stated that the bsf is an organization listed in the second schedule ..... the respondents have tried to take shelter under the plea that the right to information act, 2005 is not applicable to the border security force. the petitioner, therefore, sent a legal notice dated 13th december, 2011 ..... of the act and is thus exempted from the provisions of the said act. 8. the petitioner further contended that he is medically fit and his ..... fitness has also been certified by the specialized doctors at safdarjung hospital. despite the petitioner appearing for the review medical examination, he has not been intimated about his fitness, nor was the information disclosed by the respondents, and instead .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 24 2012 (HC)

Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board and Another Vs. Neeraj Kuma ...

Court : Delhi

..... candidate under the general category. despite this, in the final list issued on 07.10.2009, the name of the respondent did not appear.3. an application under the right to information act, 2005 was moved by the respondent to enquire as to why his name had not been included in the select list. in response to that application, the dsssb by a letter ..... dated 30.10.2009 informed the respondent that his application has been rejected as being invalid on the ground that he had signed the application in capital letters in english. it .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //