Madhusmita Saikia v. Union Public Service Commission

JUDGMENT % (ORAL)

The grievance made in this petition is that the first appeal under Section 19(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Annexure P-8) of 22nd January, 2015, in pursuance to the order of 16th December, 2014 (Annexure P-6) by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, has not been decided by the Appellate Authority.

Notice.

Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate, accepts notice of this petition.

Petitioner in person submits that she does not know about the fate of the appeal (Annexure P-8).

Learned counsel for respondent submits that the appeal (Annexure P-8) has not been filed within a period of two weeks, as directed by W.P.(C) No.8579/2015 Page 2

Coordinate Bench of this Court vide Order (Annexure P-6).

Upon hearing and on perusal of this petition and the material on record, I direct respondent to entertain petitioner's first appeal (Annexure P-8) and to decide it within a period of four weeks.

At this stage, learned counsel for respondent submits that in the event of petitioner being dissatisfied with the decision on her first appeal, the remedy would lie before the Chief Information Commissioner.

Be that as it may. Let the concerned authorities decide petitioner's first appeal (Annexure P-8) within a period of four weeks from today and intimate its fate to the petitioner.

With aforesaid directions, this petition and application are disposed of.

Copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of Court Master to counsel representing both the sides.

(SUNIL GAUR)

JUDGE September 07, 2015 r

W.P.(C) No.8579/2015 Page 1 I-8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: September 07 , 2015 + W.P.(C) 8579/2015 & C.M.No. 18565/2015 MADHUSMITA SAIKIA ..... Petitioner Through: In person. versus UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR