https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182550 A Public Information Officer, acting in his official capacity, lacks locus to maintain a writ petition challenging an appellate order under the Right to Information Act; the right to question such directions belongs to the public authority or another genuinely aggrieved person. Section 8(1)(h) exempts disclosure only where release of information would actually impede investigation, apprehension or prosecution of offenders. Mere pendency of proceedings before a tribunal is insufficient, and in the absence of material showing such prejudice, refusal to disclose cannot be sustained. On both maintainability and merits, the challenge to the appellate order failed and disclosure was not denied on a valid statutory basis. en-us Wed, 02 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 May 2016 10:38:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182550 A Public Information Officer, acting in his official capacity, lacks locus to maintain a writ petition challenging an appellate order under the Right to Information Act; the right to question such directions belongs to the public authority or another genuinely aggrieved person. Section 8(1)(h) exempts disclosure only where release of information would actually impede investigation, apprehension or prosecution of offenders. Mere pendency of proceedings before a tribunal is insufficient, and in the absence of material showing such prejudice, refusal to disclose cannot be sustained. On both maintainability and merits, the challenge to the appellate order failed and disclosure was not denied on a valid statutory basis. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 02 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182550