2015 (12) TMI 522

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The second respondent had made an application at Annexure-C dated 30-11-2009 before the Tahsildar, Devanahalli Taluk, Bangalore Rural District seeking certain information in relation to Saguvali Chit registers from the year 1933-34 till the date of the application. The Tahsildar who is also the Public Information Officer under Section 5 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short the 'Act') d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... issioner and Anr. v. State of Manipur and Anr. reported in AIR 2012 SCC 864 = 2012 (286) E.L.T. 485 (S.C.) has held that the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission has no power under S.18 to provide access to the information which has been requested for by any person but which has been denied to him. Remedy for such person who has been refused information is provided under .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as failed to furnish the information within 30 days from the date of receipt of the application, the application is deemed to have been refused. In such a situation, the remedy available to the second respondent is to file an appeal under Section 19(1) of the Act before the First Appellate Authority. The complaint made before the first respondent under Section 18(1) of the Act was not maintainable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X