Skip to main content

Consumer forum can’t act on RTI cases

A consumer forum cannot decide whether there is negligence or deficiency in service on the part of public information officers (PIO) or other authorities under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, said the Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.

In an order last month, a bench comprising commission president Justice (retd) R Regupathi, judicial member J Jayaram and member P Bakiyavathi said the Supreme Court had said the Consumer Protection Act was in addition to the provisions of other law "unless there was a clear bar." Whereas, the RTI Act had a provision which specifically said it was beyond the jurisdiction of courts.

The matter relates to a petition filed by S Jeyaram who said that under the RTI Act, he had sought some information regarding Apollo Hospitals from the public information officer and deputy/under secretary of the health and family welfare department. As the PIO failed to furnish the details, he moved north Chennai district consumer disputes redressal forum. The forum rejected the petition stating the complaint was not maintainable. Jeyaram then filed an appeal in the state commission.

He said that the relevant section of the Consumer Protection Act said: "The provisions of this act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force." As such, a person seeking information under the RTI Act could approach the consumer forum, he said

In 2013, the national commission had said that a person seeking information under the RTI Act could not be considered as a consumer as according to the relevant provision of the RTI Act, he/she had the remedy of approaching the appellate authority. Also, the RTI Act provided PIOs with independent decision making authority to decide whether disclosure of information was in public interest, said the bench.

Without being a consumer one could not seek remedy under the Consumer Protection Act, said the bench adding that after exhausting the options under the RTI Act, one could only approach the appellate forum for further reliefs and redressal of grievances.

 Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Consumer-forum-cant-act-on-RTI-cases/articleshow/45485553.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Mere Agreement To Sell The Leased Property To Tenant Would Not Terminate Landlord-Tenant Relationship

In CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1237­1238 OF 2019, Dr. H.K. Sharma vs Shri Ram Lal, the tenant had objected against the eviction suit filed by the landlord, claiming that the landlord-tenant relationship between them had ceased to exist by virtue of an agreement for sale entered between them and that he has already paid some money in advance based on the agreement. The tenant contented as the landlord-tenant relationship did not exist, the landlord cannot evict him. The matter went through various forums and finally landed before the Supreme Court in appeal. The Supreme Court referring to the judgment in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. vs. Nagappa Shankarappa Malage & Ors., held that in the instant case the lease agreement included no clauses on the fate of the tenancy. A fortiori, the parties did not intend to surrender the tenancy rights despite entering into an agreement of sale of the tenanted property. In other words, if the parties really intended to surrender their tenancy ...
2 comments
Read more

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.
2 comments
Read more