Jagesh Bhadana v. State & ANR

$~29 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 678/2018 CPIO, BANK OF MAHARASHTRA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr B.P. Singh, Advocate.

versus DAVINDER KUMAR AHLUWALIA ..... Respondent Through

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 23.01.2018 1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order dated 04.12.2017 (hereafter 'the impugned order') passed by the Central Information Commission (hereafter 'CIC') directing the CPIO, Bank of Maharashtra to explain why action under Section 20(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereafter 'the Act') should not be initiated against him.

2.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the show cause notice is premised on the basis that the information sought for by the respondent was not provided to him, which is palpably incorrect. 3.

This Court is not inclined to entertain the present petition since the matter is at the stage of a show cause notice. It will be open for the petitioner to persuade the CIC that punitive measures under Section 20(1) of

the said Act are not warranted.

4.

The petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. VIBHU BAKHRU, J JANUARY 23, 2018 RK