Central Information Commission - Judgment Search Results
Central Information Commission Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Jul-10-2024
of Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No.12714 of 2009. The High Court, by the impugned order, quashed the Central Information Commission (Management) Regulations, 2007 1 framed by the Chief Information Commissioner2 and held that the CIC has no power … ultra vires.6. The High Court framed the following questions to determine the issues at hand: “I. Whether the Central Information Commission has the authority, under the RTI Act and the Rules made thereunder, to appoint a committee comprising individuals
Satpal vs.central Information Commission & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-2018
DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:29. 01.2018 + W.P.(C) 5057/2015 SATPAL ........ Petitioner Versus ........ RESPONDENTS CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION & ORS Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the... RESPONDENTS CORAM HON’BLE MR JUSTICE … J1 The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 13.11.2014 passed by the Central Information Commission (hereafter „the CIC‟), whereby the information sought by the petitioner was denied on the ground that the same
National Human Rights Commission vs.central Information Commission & A ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-12-2017
CM Appln. No.554/2015 NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Through: Ms. Shobha and Ms. Joyshree versus Barman, Advocates. ........ Petitioner CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION & ANR. Through: Mr. Feblin Mathew, Advocate for R2. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % … filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning the order dated 04.12.2014 (hereafter 'the impugned order') passed by the Central Information Commission (CIC).2. By the impugned order, the CIC had disposed of the second appeal preferred by respondent no.2 under
18-section briefs on any result in this list
Hira Lal Bansal vs.central Information Commission & Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-10-2017
AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1000/2016 HIRA LAL BANSAL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr Saurabh Jain, Advocate. versus Through CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION & ORS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER1008.2017 ........ RESPONDENTS VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The present petition
Anjali Seth vs.central Information Commission and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-10-2017
5585/2015 & CM No.10041/2015 ANJALI SETH Through: Mr Lalit Gupta with Mr Deepak ........ Petitioner versus Agarwal, Advocates. CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION AND ORS. Through: None. ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER1008.2017 VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 None … impugning an W.P.(C) 5585/2015 Page 1 of 5 order dated 11.03.2015 (hereafter „the impugned order‟) passed by the Central Information Commission (hereinafter „the CIC‟). The petitioner claims that a plot bearing Municipal no.5, Feroz Gandhi Marg, Lajpat Nagar-III, New
National Human Rights Commission vs.central Information Commission & O ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-12-2017
+ W.P.(C) 390/2015 NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION ........ Petitioner Through: Ms Shobha and Ms Joyshree Barman, Advocates. versus CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr Feblin Mathew, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % … filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning the order dated 09.12.2014 (hereafter 'the impugned order') passed by the Central Information Commission (CIC).2. By the impugned order, the CIC had disposed of the second appeal preferred by respondent no.2 under
Kripa Shanker vs.ld Central Information Commission and Ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-2017
DELHI + W.P.(C) 8315/2017 & CM No.34196/2017 KRIPA SHANKER ........ Petitioner Through: Ms Tripta Kanojia, Advocate. versus LD CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION AND ORS Through: ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER1809.2017 VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioner … has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 19.07.2017 (hereafter 'the impugned order'), whereby the Central Information Commission (CIC) had imposed a penalty of ₹25,000/- on the petitioner for failure to supply the information as sought
Batra Hospital & Medical Research Centre vs.central Information Commis ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-2018
BATRA HOSPITAL & MEDICAL RESEARCH CENTRE ........ Petitioner Through: Mr Ashok Chhabra and Mr Nikhil Karwal, Advocates. versus CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION AND ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Respondent no.2 in person. AND W.P.(C) 707/2016 & CM No.2985/2016 BATRA HOSPITAL & … BATRA HOSPITAL & MEDICAL RESEARCH CENTRE ........ Petitioner Through: Mr Ashok Chhabra and Mr Nikhil Karwal, Advocates. versus CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION AND ANR ........ RESPONDENTS Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER0602.2018 The petitioner has filed
The Central Public Information Officer, Central Bureau of Investigatio ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-02-2018
BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, NEW DELHI ........ Petitioner Through: Mr Rahul Sharma and Mr C. K. Bhatt, Advocates. versus CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION AND ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr Anurag Pandey, Advocate for R CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % … petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order dated 09.06.2017 (hereafter „the impugned order‟) passed by the Central Information Commission (hereafter „the CIC‟) allowing the second appeal (Appeal No.CIC/SB/A/2016/001171/MP) preferred by respondent no.2 under Section 19(3) of the
Jagdish Sharma vs.central Information Commission and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-2018
pronounced on:27. 02.2018 + W.P. (C) 1865/2018 JAGDISH SHARMA ........ Petitioner Through : Mr. Pratap Sahani, Adv. versus CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION AND ANR. ....... RESPONDENTS Through : None. CORAM:-"HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) CM No.7770/2008 1. … W.P.(C) 1865/2018 2. The only grievance that the petitioner has that his appeal, which is pending before respondent no.1/Central Information Commission (CIC) has not been disposed of for almost 10 months, now.3. In these circumstances, respondent no.1/CIC is directed
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »
Hover bars for counts · use +/− or drag to zoom · click a bar to filter by year
AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free