State of Punjab v. State Information Officer & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH Present: Mr.A.K.Sharma, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the petitioner ….. Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) C.M. No.11286 of 2009 Application allowed, affidavit is taken on record. CWP No.7289 of 2009 Respondent No.2 moved an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (in short, the Act), to get copies of the documents. The requisite information was not supplied. He went to the State Information Commissioner, Punjab. Upon notice, with regard to the information demanded, the petitioner sought exemption by invoking provisions of Section 8(1)(a) of the Act. To claim exemption, it was stated that if information is supplied to the respondent No.2, it will affect economic interest of the State. That argument was rejected and the State was directed to supply the information demanded by respondent No.2. State Information Commission, Punjab observed as under in its order dated
10.2.2009:- Civil Writ Petition No.7289 of 2009 2
A reading of Clause (a) of Section 8(1) shows that information that would be exempt from disclosure under that clause would be information likely to judicially affect the sovereignty, integrity, security of India or its strategic, scientific or economic interests. The information demanded in this case i.e. notings and correspondence in the Finance Department, pertaining to the merger of DRDA staff in Zila Parishads/ Line Department, is, by no stretch of imagination, such information as may tend to judicially affect sovereignty, integrity or security of India or the strategic, scientific or economic interests of the country. The objection taken by the respondent to show the least is, far fetched and is accordingly, rejected.
This writ petition has been filed to lay challenge to above said order. Even in the additional affidavit, facts have not been disclosed to show that how financial interest of the State will suffer, in case the demanded information is supplied to respondent No.2. Copies of the documents, which respondent No.2 wants to be supplied to him, are the official notings etc. This Court feels that in view of the provisions of Section 8 of the Act, no exemption can be granted to the petitioner unless it is disclosed as to how economic interest of the State will suffer. No explanation has been furnished in that regards. No case is made out for interference. Dismissed.
14.07.2009 (Jasbir Singh) Judge
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Right to Information Act, 2005.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 14 Jul 2009. The bench was JASBIR SINGH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.