Garhwal Post Bureau
Nainital, 7 Oct: Uttarakhand High Court has ruled that the State Information Commission cannot direct any officer to conduct an inquiry under Section 18 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. A Division Bench comprising Justices Ravindra Maithani and Alok Verma held that the Commission’s powers are confined to examining reasons for delay or denial of information and imposing penalties, but do not extend to ordering inquiries by other officers.
The judgment came in a special appeal challenging a single Judge’s order of August 2017, which had upheld a directive issued by the Uttarakhand Information Commission. In this particular case, the Commission, acting on a complainant’s application, had ordered the District Magistrate of Haridwar to inquire into the complaint and submit a report to it.
The appellant contended that Section 18 of the RTI Act does not empower the Information Commission to direct any other officer to carry out an inquiry or to order the supply of information. It was submitted that the Commission’s role is limited to examining the cause of delay or denial of information and, if necessary, to impose penalties under Section 20 where malice is proved. The HC judgment today relies on a Supreme Court’s ruling in ‘Chief Information Commissioner vs State of Manipur (2011)’, which had categorically held that the Commission cannot issue directions granting access to information under Section 18.
Agreeing with these submissions, the division bench of Uttarakhand High Court today observed that the order passed by the Information Commission on 8th May 2017, directing the DM to inquire into the complaint against the appellant and to communicate the outcome to the Chief Education Officer and other officials, was beyond the ambit of its statutory powers. The Bench noted that even the State Counsel and Counsel for the complainant conceded that such an order could not be justified under Section 18.
The Court observed that the Information Commission had exceeded its jurisdiction, as Section 18 is limited to inquiring into the reasons for non-supply of information sought under the RTI Act and, where warranted, imposing a penalty. It cannot be invoked to order an independent investigation into the subject-matter of the complaint itself.
The division bench, as a result overruled the single judge’s order dated 18th August 2017 and allowed the special appeal. The ruling reaffirms that the Information Commission’s authority under Section 18 is confined to procedural oversight in the implementation of the RTI Act and not to adjudicating or investigating the underlying complaints themselves.
