Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the right to information act 2005 Year: 2007 Page 1 of about 4,236 results (0.146 seconds)

Feb 12 2007 (HC)

Gyan Ddeep Prasad and ors. Vs. the Bihar State Financial Corporation a ...

Court : Patna

Decided on : Feb-12-2007

..... petitioners case is that the same is violative of articles 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution of india as well as it violates the right guaranteed under the right of information act, 2005.2. initially these writ applications were filed for commanding the respondent bihar state financial corporation (hereinafter referred to as the b.s.f.c.) ..... were also extended to 5.2.2007.6. counsel for the petitioners have challenged clause f(1)of circular no. 7/06-07 dated 4.11.2005 on the ground that it is evidently arbitrary, illegal and violative of the provisions under the constitution of india. petitioners as per the modified scheme are ..... forged it as a bad debt and ultimately to go out of business. but simultaneously it is also true that the b.s.f.c. cannot act as private money lender when its main object is to promote industrialization giving loans to small and medium industries. the conditions which has been put in ..... defaulters, who have been put under the privilege category. counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the respondent b.s.f.c. cannot be allowed to act on pick and choose basis and the petitioners cannot be deprived of this opportunity of being benefited by the fruits of ots scheme.7. counter affidavit ..... , that is to be considered. the ots scheme 2006 has to be judged on the touch stone of reasonableness and whether the corporation has acted unfairly and unreasonably.9. petitioners case is that the categorization by the b.s.f.c. under ots scheme 2006 putting the buyer and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 29 2007 (HC)

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

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Oct-29-2007

..... 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!

Aug 16 2007 (HC)

Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs. Gujarat State Information Commission and ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Aug-16-2007

Reported in : AIR2007Guj203; (2008)2GLR1559

..... empty formality.reasons:8. i have heard the learned counsel for both the sides, who have read and re-read the following relevant provisions of the right to information act, 2005 as well as the gujarat right to information rules, 2005, are as under:sections 2(n), 7(1), 7(7), 8(d) and 8(j) and 11(1), (2), (3) and (4) and ..... be granted, if the decision is against the third party under right to information act, 2005. confidential information ought not be disclosed by the public information officer except for the situation, which are referred to hereinabove. exceptions are mentioned in the act, 2005 especially in sections 8 and 9 of the act, 2005. as stated hereinabove, public information officer should keep in mind public interest outweigh harm or injury ..... i.e. labour commissioner and appellate authority (annexure 'f' to the memo of the petition) under the right to information act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act, 2005') as well as the communication dated 9th march, 2007 issued by respondent no. 4 i.e. public information officer (annexure 'g' to the memo of the petition) and also for a writ, order or direction ..... .important issues have been raised for the adjudication by this court, under the right to information act, 2005, viz.:(i) whether the third parry is entitled to get, written notice, of request of applicant (who is seeking information), so as:(i) to allow/permit the third party to treat the information (relating to or supplied by the third party) as confidential, if so .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 03 2007 (HC)

The High Court of Gujarat by and Through B.J. Dhandha Vs. State Chief ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Oct-03-2007

Reported in : AIR2008Guj37

..... it appears, prima facie, from the facts of the case that the respondent no. 2 is a applicant, who has applied for getting information under section 6 of the right to information act, 2005 on 1st february,2006. the information, which is sought for is pertaining to vigilance inquiry conducted by district court, ahmedabad (rural), which is pertaining to one shri v.j ..... , first appeal no. 1 of 2006 was preferred by respondent no. 2, under section 19 of the right to information act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the act, 2005) before registrar (administration) - first appellate authority of the high court of gujarat under the act, 2005. the first appellate authority adjudicated the appeal and dismissed the same vide order dated 3rd april,2006. being ..... respondent no. 2. 2. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent no. 2 preferred an application for getting information under the right to information act, 2005 to the public information officer, high court of gujarat on 1st february,2006, whereby following information were sought for:(i) certified copy of report made by civil judge (j.d.), sanand, district: ahmedabad on 29/ ..... be supplied to respondent no. 2. (ii) it is also kept in mind by all the public information officer, first appellate authority as well as second appellate authority under the right to information act, 2005 that if any information, which is sought for is relating to third party or supplied by third party or has been treated as confidential by that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 2007 (HC)

State of Jharkhand and anr. Vs. NavIn Kumar Sinhga and anr.

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Aug-08-2007

Reported in : AIR2008Jhar19; [2007(3)JCR668(Jhr)]

..... the rival contentions made by the learned counsels, i would first like to discuss the relevant provisions of right to information act, 2005 under which relief was sought for.16. the right to information act, 2005 has been enacted to provide for a legal right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of ..... every public authority. by the said act 2005, the earlier act, namely, the freedom of information act, 2002 has been repealed.17. as a matter ..... and the constitutional guarantee vis-a-vis supreme court observations the parliament enacted the right to information act, 2005.21. from reading of the preamble and the object of the act, it is manifestly clear that the scope of freedom of information has been enhanced with the object and purpose to give right to information to its citizens so that there exists transparency in government dealings.22. section .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 2007 (HC)

Bhagat Singh Vs. Chief Information Commissioner and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Dec-03-2007

Reported in : 146(2008)DLT385; 2008(100)DRJ63

..... . the petitioner in the present writ proceeding approaches this court seeking partial quashing of an order of the central information commission and also for a direction from this court that the information sought by him under the right to information act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') should be supplied with immediate effect.2. the facts relevant to decide the case are as follows. the petitioner ..... court on a number of decisions and after public demand, the right to information act, 2005 was enacted and brought into force.12. the act is an effectuation of the right to freedom of speech and expression. in an increasingly knowledge based society, information and access to information holds the key to resources, benefits, and distribution of power. information, more than any other element, is of critical importance in ..... a participatory democracy. by one fell stroke, under the act, the maze of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 17 2007 (HC)

Union Public Service Commission Vs. Centran Information Commission and ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-17-2007

Reported in : 139(2007)DLT608

..... petition praying for the setting aside of the order dated 13.11.2006 passed by the central information commission, new delhi in an appeal under section 19(3) of the right to information act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the rti act').2. the issue involved in the present petition relates to the disclosure of cut-off marks ..... case be made public from time to time. in doing so, it shall duly take into account the provisions of section 9 of the rti act.9. before the central information commission, various points were taken by the respondents 2 to 24 in support of their appeals. they were, inter alia, that the ..... finding that upsc does not have any cut-offs is wrong; that the upsc cannot withhold information under section 8(1)(d) and 8(2) of the rti act; that disclosure of the information sought would not derail the system; since marks of the main examination are published, there could be no ..... disclosure would have no bearing whatsoever on the next years examination. thereforee, even if it is assumed that it is 'information' within the meaning of section 8(1)(d) of the rti act, its disclosure would not harm the competitive position of any third party. in any event, the upsc being a public ..... larger public interest. candidates have the right to know where they went wrong. one sure way of informing them in this regard is by disclosing the model answers.27. as regards the stand taken by the upsc of taking cover under section 8(1)(d) of the rti act, i feel that that is wholly .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 17 2007 (HC)

Virender Kumar Vs. P.S. Rana and anr.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : May-17-2007

Reported in : AIR2007HP63

..... deepak gupta, j.1. the short question which arises for decision in the present case is whether the state information commission to be constituted under the right to information act, 2005, (hereinafter referred to as the act) can be a single member body or must be a multi member body.2. the petitioner has filed this writ petition alleging that the state of himachal ..... constituted in the near future.17. we, therefore, allow this writ petition and direct the respondent no. 2 state of himachal pradesh to appoint at least one state information commissioner in accordance with section 15(2)(b) of the right to information act, 2005. this be positively done within 8 weeks from today. in case the state fails to appoint a state ..... information commissioner in terms of this order in the time so stipulated, the state information commission being an improperly constituted body shall cease to exist or function and all consequences shall follow ..... pradesh has only appointed the chief information, commissioner and has not appointed any state information commissioner(s) and, therefore, the constitution .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 23 2007 (HC)

Mr. Surupsingh Hrya Naik Vs. State of Maharashtra Through Additional S ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-23-2007

Reported in : AIR2007Bom121; 2007(3)ALLMR442; 2007(3)BomCR134; (2007)109BOMLR844; 2007(4)MhLj573

..... . : [1993]1scr594 .10. the question that we are really called upon to answer is the right of an individual, to keep certain matters confidential on the one hand and the right of the public to be informed on the other, considering the provisions of the right to information act, 2005. in the instant case on facts we are dealing with the issue of to person convicted ..... 544, to which our attention was invited by the learned counsel for the petitioner. in that case what was in issue was the proviso to section 5 of the goa rights of information act, 1997. the proviso there was placed after the various provisions. the learned single judge while construing the effect of the proviso, restricted it only to sub-sections 5( ..... as such could not have been disclosed to respondent no. 5 without the consent of the petitioner. (b) it is next submitted that considering section 19(4) of the right to information act before passing an order against the petitioner, the respondent no. 2 was bound to give notice to the petitioner herein. such notice has not been given and consequently the ..... respondent no. 5, who appears in person. 7. before considering the arguments, it would be appropriate if we consider some of the provisions of the right to information act. section 2(f) which defines 'information', reads as under:2(f) 'information' means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 21 2007 (TRI)

S.K. Sood, Ias Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Decided on : Aug-21-2007

Reported in : (2008)(2)SLJ94CAT

..... the respondent (sc commission) have espoused the case of the applicant with a further submission that as per the right to information act, 2005 under section 4( 1 )(b)(v) every public authority, including the respondent no. 1 should have displayed on their website information meant for the public, including the officers at the level of the applicant why not mentioning the entire particulars, ..... fide or arbitrariness or violation of the rules though appointment to the level of the secretary to the government of india and empanelment cannot be claimed as a fundamental right but right of consideration is paramount. as the applicant has been considered and was not empanelled on finality of approval by the competent authority, he cannot claim the status of ..... perused the records produced by the respondents' counsel.20. at the outset, though pragmatism has been brought in our judicial system and equity may not be a positive right but a rightful consideration in dispensation of justice, the doctrines of promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation have been recognized as valid doctrines and with their enforceability in rule of law. however, ..... being appointed as a secretary to the government of india. he remains as an additional secretary and the records concerning the order passed on 26.07.2005 leave no doubt in .....

Tag this Judgment!

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