CIC/SA/A/2015/000454. Case: Bhan Singh Vs PIO, Tis Hazari Court. Central Information Commission
|Party Name:||Bhan Singh Vs PIO, Tis Hazari Court|
|Judges:||Sridhar Acharyulu, Information Commissioner|
|Issue:||Right To Information Act, 2005 - Sections 8(1)(h), 8(1)(J)|
|Judgement Date:||August 25, 2015|
|Court:||Central Information Commission|
Sridhar Acharyulu, Information Commissioner
1. Appellant is present. None represents Public authority.
2. Appellant through his RTI application sought to know norms & criteria adopted in transferring the suit No. CS-721/2007 from court of Ms. Richa Manchanda, Civil Judge, to court of Sh. Jitendra Pratap Singh; under what circumstances it was transferred; rationale behind it; how many cases transferred on that day when this case was transferred etc. CPIO replied that information is exempted under section 7(6) of Delhi District Court (Right to information) Rules 2008 and 8(1)(h)&(j) of RTI. Appellant filed first appeal. First appellate authority upheld CPIO reply. Claiming wrongful denial of information, appellant approached the Commission.
Proceedings Before the Commission:
3. The appellant stated that transfer of case was administrative decision. The file of his case was transferred within Tis Hazari court secretly. Mr. Bhan Singh, who is plaintiff in suit No. CS-2007 alleged that the case while being heard by Ms. Richa Manchanda, Civil Judge of Tis Hazari Court in Delhi, it was abruptly transferred to the court of Shri Jitendra Pratap Singh, Civil Judge within the same premises by giving new No. CS-384/2014. The appellant says that there was no application requesting for such transfer from any side. The suit was at the stage of trial for considering the evidence, he submitted written evidence, and cross examination was pending. At that stage, case was transferred to different court where the issues were freshly framed.
4. The appellant says the transfer of case from one court to other was not in judicial process, it was only a decision regarding moving of the file from one court to another, which was not openly done. He alleged that it was secretly managed. He says the case in the transferred court started with framing of issue and abruptly ended with dismissal without even taking evidence. The appellant has challenged the decision of Mr. Jitendra Pratap Singh in the court of law.
5. The CPIO Usha Arora in her reply dated 03.12.2014 stated that the information sought related to judicial...
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL