Court Rules Mandatory Hearing Opportunity Was Denied Before Imposing Fine
In a significant decision, the Chhattisgarh High Court has set aside a penalty imposed on Amarchand Pahare, a Public Information Officer (PIO), by the Chhattisgarh State Information Commission. The penalty, amounting to Rs. 25,000, was levied under Section 20(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, for alleged non-compliance in providing requested information. The court found that the statutory procedure requiring an adequate opportunity for the PIO to be heard was not followed, thus rendering the penalty invalid.
The case originated from an application filed by Satendra Verma, seeking details of items auctioned under the skill development scheme. Dissatisfied with the PIO's response, which termed the information as voluminous and unclear, Verma escalated the matter, resulting in an appeal before the First Appellate Authority. Despite directives to provide the information, Verma filed a second appeal with the State Information Commission, which subsequently imposed the penalty without issuing a specific notice for the penalty hearing.
Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, presiding over the case, emphasized the importance of adhering strictly to the statutory provisions of the RTI Act. The court underscored that treating a previous notice issued during appeal proceedings as a final notice for penalty was not legally permissible. The judgment highlights the necessity for statutory compliance in the imposition of penalties, ensuring procedural fairness and transparency.
The decision not only provides relief to the petitioner but also sets a precedent for similar cases, reinforcing the procedural safeguards embedded within the RTI Act. Advocates representing the petitioner argued that the mandatory notice under Section 20(1) was not issued, a contention the court upheld, emphasizing the need for an adequate hearing opportunity before imposing penalties.
The ruling reiterates the judiciary's role in safeguarding statutory procedures and ensuring that deviations do not undermine the legal framework. It serves as a reminder to information commissions across the country to adhere to procedural norms and uphold the principles of natural justice.
Bottom line:-
Right to Information Act - Imposition of penalty under Section 20(1) - Adequate opportunity of hearing to the Public Information Officer is mandatory before imposing penalty.
Statutory provision(s): Right to Information Act, 2005 Section 20(1)
