Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Pranav Awasthy Vs. the Central Public Information Commission

Pranav Awasthy vs The Central Public Information Commission

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Apr 10, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1053901

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pranav Awasthy

Advocate Shri. Praveen Dubey

Respondent

The Central Public Information Commission

Excerpt

w.p.no.4892/2013 10/04/2013 shri praveen dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. shri r.s.sidhiqui, learned assistant solicitor general appears for the respondents on advance notice. petitioner is a resident of jabalpur and it is stated that he has filed certain application seeking information from the cantonment board, jabalpur under the right to information act. when the information was not given by the information officer i.e.respondent no.3, petitioner preferred an appeal before respondent no.2 the appellate authority but in accordance with the statutory provision as no decision is taken within the period prescribed, petitioner preferred a second appeal i.e.annexure-p4, which is pending before respondent no.1 namely chief information commissioner. copy of the second appeal said to have been filed is available at page-23 and acknowledgment of the same is also brought on record, which is available at page-29. grievance of the petitioner is that the matter is kept pending for a period of one year and no decision is being taken. considering the aforesaid grievance of the petitioner, for the present without entering into the controvers.on merit, respondent no.1 is directed to take note of the aforesaid grievance of the petitioner and pass appropriate order in accordance with law on the appeal said to have been filed. on the petitioner's filing a certified copy of this order along with relevant documents, respondent no.1 shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a reasonable time and communicate the decision to the petitioner. in case, it is found that no such second appeal is filed, the said respondent shall communicate the reasons and the grounds to the petitioner. with the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of. certified copy as per rules. (rajendra menon) judge nd

Full Judgment

W.P.No.4892/2013 10/04/2013 Shri Praveen Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Shri R.S.Sidhiqui, learned Assistant Solicitor General appears for the respondents on advance notice.

Petitioner is a resident of Jabalpur and it is stated that he has filed certain application seeking information from the Cantonment Board, Jabalpur under the Right to Information Act.

When the information was not given by the Information Officer i.e.Respondent No.3, petitioner preferred an appeal before Respondent No.2 the appellate authority but in accordance with the statutory provision as no decision is taken within the period prescribed, petitioner preferred a second appeal i.e.Annexure-P4, which is pending before Respondent No.1 namely Chief Information Commissioner.

Copy of the second appeal said to have been filed is available at Page-23 and acknowledgment of the same is also brought on record, which is available at Page-29.

Grievance of the petitioner is that the matter is kept pending for a period of one year and no decision is being taken.

Considering the aforesaid grievance of the petitioner, for the present without entering into the controveRs.on merit, Respondent No.1 is directed to take note of the aforesaid grievance of the petitioner and pass appropriate order in accordance with law on the appeal said to have been filed.

On the petitioner's filing a certified copy of this order along with relevant documents, Respondent No.1 shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a reasonable time and communicate the decision to the petitioner.

In case, it is found that no such second appeal is filed, the said respondent shall communicate the reasons and the grounds to the petitioner.

With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of.

Certified Copy as per rules.

(Rajendra Menon) Judge nd

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial