https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288357 The court upheld the Central Information Commission's decision to impose a penalty on both the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Gupta for failing to fulfill their obligations as Public Information Officers under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The petitioner's argument that his role was merely to forward requests was rejected, emphasizing that PIOs are responsible for providing timely and accurate information, not just acting as intermediaries. The court affirmed the equal apportionment of the penalty between the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Gupta, dismissing the petition without costs. en-us Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Jun 2020 17:49:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288357 The court upheld the Central Information Commission's decision to impose a penalty on both the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Gupta for failing to fulfill their obligations as Public Information Officers under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The petitioner's argument that his role was merely to forward requests was rejected, emphasizing that PIOs are responsible for providing timely and accurate information, not just acting as intermediaries. The court affirmed the equal apportionment of the penalty between the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Gupta, dismissing the petition without costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288357