Very often the orders given by Information Commissions are stayed by the High Courts without any reference to the RTI applicant.
Such cases languish for long periods and are effectively lost because most applicants find it difficult pursue them.
Thus public authorities render the orders of the Commissions on giving information, penalties and others ineffective.
Section 23 of the RTI Act clearly states:”No court shall entertain any suit, application or other proceeding in respect of any order made under this Act and no such order shall be called in question otherwise than by way of an appeal under this Act.” However courts entertain most of these under their writ jurisdiction. My considered view is that most of these cases are appeals wrongly labelled as Writs.
In most cases the applicant is not even informed about the hearing in which the stay is given. Article 226 (3) of the Constitution is a remedy for such conditions.
I have often wanted to challenge these practices and when the Maharashtra Commission issued an order confirming that Mumbai Metro was a public authority, i had prepared my challenge on these grounds ( with generous help from young advocate Sandeep Jalan). As luck would have it, Reliance did not challenge the order and hence i missed the opportunity. When i was talking with Anjali Bhardwaj this morning she suggested that i should share the draft, so that these grounds could be used. I am attaching the 1500 word petition.
A few changes to suit your particular case may be required. I would be glad to assist. An applicant could file such a petition and
Alternately, Sandeep Jalan may be willing to give professional help His contact: Sandeep Jalan ; 9820671212
Courtesy : Shailesh Gandhi