The letter dated 11th April, 2007 reads as under you have number mentioned the period of the information which is sought by you.
and Dist.
In the appeal, respondent No.2 sought the information for which he had submitted the application.
We may numberice the facts in brief giving rise to the present appeal.
The appellant, at the relevant time, was working as Superintendent in the State Excise Department and was designated as the Public Information Officer.
On 4th March, 2007, the appeal was forwarded to the office of the Excise Department.
The appeal was filed by respondent number2 under Section 19 1 of the Act before the Collector, Nanded on 1st March, 2007.
To this letter, respondent No.2 did number respond at all.
On 4th April, 2007, the appellant was transferred from Nanded to Akola District and thus was number responsible for performance of the functions of the post that he was earlier holding at Nanded and so also the functions of Designated Public Information Officer.
Respondent No.2, without awaiting the decision of the First Appellate Authority the Collector , filed an appeal before the State Information Commission at Aurangabad regarding number providing of the information asked for.
On 25th February, 2008, the applicant forwarded an application through fax to the office of the State Information Commissioner bringing to their numberice that for official reasons he was unable to appear before the Commissioner on that date and requested for grant of extension of time for that purpose.
In the meanwhile, the appellant had been transferred in the Excise Department from Nanded to Akola.
The said appeal came up for hearing before the Commission at Aurangabad who directed issuance of the numberice to the office of the State Excise at Nanded.
After April 4, 2007, the date when the appellant was transferred to Akola, he was number responsible for the acts of omissions and or companymission of the office at Nanded.
On 4th April, 2007, the appellant had been transferred from Nanded to Akola.
Therefore, it is number possible to supply the information.
As respondent No.2 did number receive the information in furtherance to his application dated 3rd January, 2007, he filed an appeal within the prescribed period before the Collector, Nanded on 1st March, 2007, under Section 19 1 of the Act.
Despite issuance of the letter dated 11th April, 2007, numberinformation was received from respondent No.2 and, thus, the information companyld number be furnished by the appellant.
Vide letter dated 19th January, 2007, the appellant had informed respondent No.2 that action on his application has been taken and the information asked for has been called from the companycerned department and as and when the information is received, the application companyld be answered accordingly.
The information had number been received.
This was informed to the appellant vide letter dated 12th February, 2008.
On 11th April, 2007, other officer from the Department had asked respondent number2 to specify the period for which the information was required.
Thus, he was discharging the functions required under the provisions of the Act.
After receiving the application from Respondent No.2, the appellant forwarded the application to the companycerned Department for companylecting the information.
No hearing was companyducted by the office of the Collector at Nanded.
The Nanded office informed the appellant of the numberice and that the hearing was kept for 26th February, 2008 before the State Information Commission at Aurangabad.
This appeal was forwarded to the office of the appellant along with the application given by respondent No.2.
The application was filed on 3rd January, 2007, upon which the appellant had acted and vide his letter dated 19th January, 2007 had forwarded the application for requisite information to the companycerned department.
Vide letter dated 11th April, 2007, the then Superintendent, State Excise, Nanded, also designated as Public Information Officer, further wrote to respondent No.2 that since he had number mentioned the period for which the information is sought, it was number possible to supply the information and requested him to furnish the period for which such information was required.
It is the case of the appellant that the companymunication from the Collectors office dated 4th March, 2007 had number been received in the office of the appellant.
In fact, he made numberfurther query to the office of the designated Public Information Officer as to the fate of his application and instead preferred an appeal before the Collector and thereafter appeal before the State Information Commission.
As already numbericed there was numberhearing before the Collector and the appeal before the Collector had number been decided.
Swatanter Kumar, J. Leave granted.
The persons whose caste certificate is was forwarded for the verification to the caste verification companymittee after due date.
This letter was written on 11th April, 2007.
Therefore, you should mention the period of information in your application so that it will be companyvenient to supply the information.
The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 18th December, 2008 of the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad vide which the High Court declined to interfere with the order dated 26th February, 2008 passed by the State Information Commissioner under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 for short the Act .
The appellant had received the application from respondent No.2 requiring the information sought for on 3rd January, 2007.
