An RTI appellant from Puri district has filed a writ petition in the Odisha High Court seeking withdrawal of the alleged derogatory and defamatory language used in the decision of a case by State Information Commissioner (SIC) Jagadanand.
Appellant Jayant Kumar Das has alleged that the Information Commissioner has committed two mistakes by closing the case without ensuring information and reflecting derogatory and perverse remarks of the PIO against the complainant in his decision which is illegal and against judicial decorum.
Das has said that while deciding a second appeal case on February 9 last year, Jagadanand remanded the case to the First Appellate Authority, State Health and Family Welfare Department and wrote the objectionable and illegal remarks of the PIO (the petitioner is involved in fraudulent land deal with many persons including Sanat Mohapatra and was arrested in a criminal case).
“This sentence is illegal, perverse and non-application of judicial mind. I have also alleged in my petition that the SIC lacks minimum knowledge about the RTI Act,” said Das, adding, “Without hearing from the petitioner, how he recorded the statement of the PIO and reflected on the order sheet which does not come within the domain of the commission.”
On August 1, 2011, Das had submitted an RTI application to the PIO, office of the State Health and Family Welfare Department seeking information relating to moveable and immoveable property details of Sanat Kumar Mohapatra, who was serving as an assistant surgeon in police hospital at Puri and his family members. The PIO rejected RTI application on the ground of section 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act. Being aggrieved by the decision of the PIO, he later made first appeal before the first appellate authority for illegally dismissing the appeal on the ground that the appellant is found absent and did not request for further date.
Then, Das made the second appeal to the Commission. On February 2 last year, the SIC heard the case and without directing the PIO to provide the information again remanded to the First Appellate Authority for disposal who had earlier rejected the first appeal.
“Many Information Commissioners across India, Madras High Court, Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Supreme Court have already given judgments about disclosure of property statement of officers coming under purview of the RTI Act. Then why the SIC is not supplying me the required information,” questioned Das.