{"id":253350,"date":"2010-10-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010"},"modified":"2014-02-25T03:17:02","modified_gmt":"2014-02-24T21:47:02","slug":"shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"Shri A Nagabhushanam vs The Karnataka Information … on 23 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Shri A Nagabhushanam vs The Karnataka Information … on 23 October, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: S.N.Satyanarayana<\/div>\n
1\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT \n\nDATED THIS THE 23R\u00bb DAY OF OCTOBER zof\ufb01r   4%\nTHE HOITBLE MR. JUSTICE  I\n\nWRIT PETITION NO.35.24.9_ OF' 200:;  Ti; \nBETWEEN:      \nSHRI.A.NAGABHUSHANAM;\n\nS\/0 Balappa,  \n\nAged about 55 Years,   v .\nR\/at No.47\/5A, 17\"? Cross,  _  '\n14\"? Main, Malleswaram, '\n\nBANGALORE-560     ..PET1T1oNER.\n\n .M,\/ SI ' Kuff\ufb01ar 8: _ K1_iI\ufb02al'--,\u00bb Adv.)\n\n1. THE ;i<A12NATA1<AVINFOO.RMAT10N\n\nCOMMESSION,'   .  '\nHI F1001", 'M1V:ltiVSt0r'veye61 '\nBtjilding, Vid}:1_a1'1a Veedhi,\n\n  -  001.\n\nfsiepresented by Chief\n\n" I;r1fOrf11a_1tiO:1_ ( j.0mm1'ssi0ner.\n\n  'eAsHR1.sR1:~n7vAs RDHONDALE.\n\nAged V-._a\u00a71b01*jt 55 Years.\n R\/atvND.22, I Floor, 11 Cross,\n"  AA Cholurpalya, Magadi Road.\n[ 'BANGALORE. .. RESPONDENTS.<\/pre>\n
 (By Sri.R.B.Satyanarayan Singh,
\nO HCGP for R-1,
\nRespondent No.2 — Served) ,<\/p>\n
*M*M*m*_sM*W*%*<\/p>\n
license. To the said endorsement a reply was sei1–t”hy.yA42″d<\/p>\n
respondent on 24.09.2008 stating that the  4_<\/p>\n
he intend to start the business  not j <\/p>\n
assessed to tax, and was not entered  theilgatha <\/p>\n
Therefore B.B.M.P., is not  the V  l”doci,1inentls’.<\/p>\n
Second respondent also otherwise the said
\ndocuments are not requiredl’tol’V’iief:’ along with the
\napplication   2007.\n<\/p>\n
3. After  from B.B.M.P..\n<\/p>\n
for considerahleil   two applications under<\/p>\n
Right to Information  \ufb01led by the 2119” respondent<\/p>\n
seeking; the stage.  the application submitted by hini for<\/p>\n
llgrant. To the said applications, he received a reply<\/p>\n
 on”  the Public Information Of\ufb01cer, BBMP.<\/p>\n
 V Bpangalore;”–l:Spi:ati11g that only one Officer has dealt with the file<\/p>\n
 his application from the date of application till<\/p>\n
 –thelh”date, he sought information regarding ‘said application.<\/p>\n
.  V  ” reply it was also indicated that the said \ufb01le continues<\/p>\n
‘W1<\/p>\n
Of\ufb01ce in Jagjivanramnagar. Even after such transfer, he has<\/p>\n
not surrendered the file and continue to keep the.,V_fil_e<\/p>\n
him. Therefore in the absence of relevant doctt-:nent,.i’phewas<\/p>\n
compelled to issue the endorsement_da.ted which\u00bb ,4 <\/p>\n
is at Annexure —  to this proceeding.  *~ <\/p>\n
5. Thereafter the first respondent therein: ‘notice<\/p>\n
to petitioner to his  ..,V_of\ufb01ce”” ‘eadclress.  Admittedly the
\npetitioner is a Public  ‘sent to a Public<\/p>\n
Servant to their\u00a7of:’ice-adtiressfin\u00abn’orInal::\u00e9ourse cannot come<\/p>\n
back und_eli\\_rere(i–“.Vnriless,.\u00bb_f”the– intention of the Officer is<\/p>\n
otherwise. 31;  case, notice has come back<\/p>\n
._unserve%d,l ieTherea;fter the first respondent left with no other<\/p>\n
‘o_pti.on…_Vafter.pre:~las_certaining the address of petitioner, which<\/p>\n
 is the same ‘address, to which earlier notice was addressed.<\/p>\n
 sent colrraniunication to petitioner through the Medical Officer<\/p>\n
 Jagjivanramnagar, with a direction to serve the<\/p>\n
 __notice on the petitioner herein. It is seen that after<\/p>\n
  extreme step of getting notice served to him<\/p>\n
through his Superior Officer, petitioner herein reluctantly<\/p>\n
“\\<\/p>\n
appeared before first respondent on 06.11.2009’ and<\/p>\n
shamelessly admitted that he is in possession of the file<\/p>\n
pertaining to applications regarding grant of license-to” <\/p>\n
respondent for running his restaura:1tt’busin’ess.4  V  in<\/p>\n
6. When the petitioner admittedly  <\/p>\n
Ward No.27 to Jagjivanranmag.a}\u00ab,Ward-   of
\nNovember 2008, he had rio..V_1ous.in’ess:’tojt:a._n*yA the’\ufb01’1ew1’th him
\nto his new office;  therefis’ iiowexplanation for this
\nstrange behaavio  o1i7,peti.tiorier  in this writ petition or
\nbefore theifirst’  said proceedings. When the<\/p>\n
petitioner herein .,admitted.:_”..’about keeping the records with<\/p>\n
  anyiifalid__’reason and not taking any steps for<\/p>\n
clearing.the’=app’iication fiied by respondent No.2 and also<\/p>\n
 V..vobstro.c’ting&ti;ie_V\u00a7’1a1blic Information Officer in giving relevant<\/p>\n
“\u00bb..,_..\u00a7nfor1natiori'{r.oV second respondent under Right to Information<\/p>\n
  i.the-f_.\ufb01rst respondent rightly heid the delinquent official,<\/p>\n
.   the petitioner herein as deemed Information Officer under<\/p>\n
 Act. After hearing him the 18* respondent has rightly<\/p>\n
‘\u00b0’\\<\/p>\n
imposed ma>d1num penalty of Rs.25,000\/- and also._d-irected<\/p>\n
the B.B.M.P., to hold an enquiry in this ‘behalf.  it<\/p>\n
7. The said order is impugned   ‘<\/p>\n
proceeding on the ground that he is nottize   ,<\/p>\n
Information Officer under   5  pthe.’:’;Right to
\nInformation Act<\/a>, 2005.   the\ufb02vorder, the
\nfirst respondent didnot give to him to
\ndecide the   petitioner for alleged
\nobstruction   under the Right to
\nInforinatioii Act. is” contention that whatever the<\/p>\n
information    by the Health Officer,<\/p>\n
 on d5;05_,_2.009, could have been issued by him<\/p>\n
u\ufb01-.thin’the  Because of the delay caused by the<\/p>\n
:””vr.._w_Healtl1  he cannot be saddled with the<\/p>\n
penalty of Rs.25,000\/–.\n<\/p>\n
I<\/p>\n
   the counsel for petitioner and the learned<\/p>\n
it {}ov’ernment Pieader appearing on behalf of first respondent.<\/p>\n
“*1<\/p>\n
9. On perusal of the records which  .byr_:the><\/p>\n
\ufb01rst respondent with reference to the  <\/p>\n
first respondent under Rights’to__ Infor;[I’iatior;V’_p~Vit <\/p>\n
discloses that the petitioner  consideration not
\nonly withheld the app1ica’tion  respondent, has
\nalso taken steps tocsee   would not
\nbe left with     approach him for his
\nWork, even. afte1*.the;lV’\ufb01\u00a7{as :from the said place. His
\nconduct    the 271-11 Division with him<\/p>\n
even after   ” Jagjivanramnagar oifice clearly<\/p>\n
~tn_dicavte’s  VVp1nte’:eeion.,.V It is further seen that when the<\/p>\n
second brought to his notice under Suvarna<\/p>\n
‘   Arog’3za”Parav2Lnige, 2007, such documents were not required<\/p>\n
be produced, petitioner had no business to retain that \ufb01ie<\/p>\n
  he ought to have disposed of the same or in the<\/p>\n
h  —..al’teri1ative while he was giving charge to the new officer,<\/p>\n
 t\u00bb\u00bb..si1ouid have handed over that file to the Health Inspector,<\/p>\n
W<\/p>\n
‘3 0<\/p>\n
Information Officer\/General Manager~in–cha:rge, <\/p>\n
District and others Vs. The Tamil Nada-..’::” 4_<\/p>\n
Commission 81 Others state that no su’f\ufb02c.ient op.pjort_unity was i j A’<\/p>\n
given to him to substantiate his stand_:before–,yA.th,e2 <\/p>\n
penalty was imposed on him he   the
\nPublic Information Of\ufb01ceri’ questio’n  imposing
\npenalty on him is contrary law and that
\nthe first respondentp:y1’11asA__   the principles as
\nsecondaiy   ‘Wednesbury principles.\n<\/p>\n
On perusVai”V\u00a2f*   it is seen that the
\ncontext “\ufb01nding was given by the said<\/p>\n
Court is; totai1y4’Vdiiifei’ent.’fro.n1 the facts and circumstances on<\/p>\n
  aforesaidjudgment, before imposing penalty.<\/p>\n
petition_ers’~v :w.e_reV]vri’ot heard, whereas in the instant case,<\/p>\n
V ‘Vthough”—sufiicient opportunity was given at earlier stage. it is<\/p>\n
 petitioner who deliberately avoided to appear before the<\/p>\n
 f1i7StiR[spondent and \ufb01nally when the notice was issued to<\/p>\n
T “h:in”1″through his Superior Of\ufb01cer, he has appeared before the<\/p>\n
 i’irst respondent and has admitted in unequivocal terms that<\/p>\n
“‘*”‘i<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
the application dated 28.08.2008 continue to bet-“in his
\ncustody even on the date when he appeared <\/p>\n
respondent on 06.11.2009.\n<\/p>\n
12. Admittedly by that time he was  if V<\/p>\n
the office to which the said application. beiongs ther\u00a7”‘m\\rasp<\/p>\n
no explanation available with for retaining the said \ufb01le
\neven beyond the period “one.’VAye:aVr”  transfer from the
\nplace to which the said and also his<\/p>\n
conduct in not  t’ne”aut-hiority on earlier two<\/p>\n
occasions when noticje\ufb01faisl’ issued to him and not handing the<\/p>\n
entire file tovfthe  inforrnation Officer, when the said<\/p>\n
I<\/p>\n
I..~()fficer_fss91}?glit._the “\ufb01’i\u20ac.___fQr giving reply to the appiication filed<\/p>\n
by, ti1e”second resp.ondent, clearly discloses his intention is to<\/p>\n
‘ V’ =.._;._harassg’tb.e secoj_n.d respondent for obvious reasons. Therefore<\/p>\n
.the_ \ufb01rst respondent after giving sufficient opportunity to the<\/p>\n
 \u00abpetitioner herein and considering all the submissions made<\/p>\n
H    personally before the 18′ respondent has rightly<\/p>\n
 iniposed maximum penalty of Rs.25,000\/~ to the petitioner.<\/p>\n
I<\/p>\n
‘Wt<\/p>\n
today. The Registry is directed to mark a copy of this*’ to
\nCommissioner, B.B.M.P., to enter this in the  <\/p>\n
of the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
AGV.\n<\/p>\n
\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Shri A Nagabhushanam vs The Karnataka Information … on 23 October, 2010 Author: S.N.Satyanarayana 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DATED THIS THE 23R\u00bb DAY OF OCTOBER zof\ufb01r 4% THE HOITBLE MR. JUSTICE I WRIT PETITION NO.35.24.9_ OF’ 200:; Ti; BETWEEN: SHRI.A.NAGABHUSHANAM; S\/0 Balappa, Aged about 55 Years, v . […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-253350","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nShri A Nagabhushanam vs The Karnataka Information ... on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri A Nagabhushanam vs The Karnataka Information ... on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-02-24T21:47:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri A Nagabhushanam vs The Karnataka Information … on 23 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-02-24T21:47:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1175,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010\",\"name\":\"Shri A Nagabhushanam vs The Karnataka Information ... on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-02-24T21:47:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri A Nagabhushanam vs The Karnataka Information … on 23 October, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Shri A Nagabhushanam vs The Karnataka Information ... on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri A Nagabhushanam vs The Karnataka Information ... on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-02-24T21:47:02+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri A Nagabhushanam vs The Karnataka Information … on 23 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-02-24T21:47:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010"},"wordCount":1175,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010","name":"Shri A Nagabhushanam vs The Karnataka Information ... on 23 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-02-24T21:47:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-a-nagabhushanam-vs-the-karnataka-information-on-23-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri A Nagabhushanam vs The Karnataka Information … on 23 October, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/253350","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=253350"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/253350\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=253350"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=253350"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=253350"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}