{"id":25379,"date":"2011-03-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-03-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011"},"modified":"2018-11-20T00:16:42","modified_gmt":"2018-11-19T18:46:42","slug":"mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011","title":{"rendered":"Mr. Raghavendra Rao Editor vs Vice-President Secratariat on 29 March, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission<\/div>\n
Mr. Raghavendra Rao Editor vs Vice-President Secratariat on 29 March, 2011<\/div>\n
                       Central\u00a0Information\u00a0Commission,\u00a0New\u00a0Delhi\n                      File\u00a0No.CIC\/WB\/A\/2010\/000279,\u00a0280,\u00a0281\u00a0&\u00a0283\n                    Right\u00a0to\u00a0Information\u00a0Act\u00ad2005\u00adUnder\u00a0Section\u00a0\u00a0(19)\n\n\nDate\u00a0of\u00a0hearing                        :                                29\u00a0March\u00a02011\n\n\nDate\u00a0of\u00a0decision                       :                                29\u00a0March\u00a02011\n\n\n\nName\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Appellant\u00a0                 :   Shri\u00a0Vipin\u00a0Kumar\n                                           Editor,\u00a0Room\u00a0No.\u00a0221,\n                                           Rajya\u00a0Sabha\u00a0Secretariat,\n                                           Parliament\u00a0House\u00a0Annexe,\u00a0New\u00a0Delhi.\n\n\n                                           Shri\u00a0Rajesh\u00a0Kumar\u00a0Bhardwaj\n                                           Editor,\u00a0Room\u00a0No.\u00a0225,\u00a0\n                                           Rajya\u00a0Sabha\u00a0Secretariat,\n                                           Parliament\u00a0House\u00a0Annexe,\u00a0New\u00a0Delhi.\n\n\n                                           Smt.\u00a0Nirupa\u00a0Belwal\n                                           Editor,\u00a0Room\u00a0No.\u00a0221,\u00a0\n                                           Rajya\u00a0Sabha\u00a0Secretariat,\n                                           Parliament\u00a0House\u00a0Annexe,\u00a0New\u00a0Delhi.\n\n\n                                           Shri\u00a0Raghvendra\u00a0Rao,\n                                           Editor,\u00a0Room\u00a0No.\u00a0225,\n                                           Rajya\u00a0Sabha\u00a0Secretariat,\n                                           Parliament\u00a0House\u00a0Annexe,\u00a0New\u00a0Delhi.\n\n\nName\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Public\u00a0Authority\u00a0\u00a0         :   Central\u00a0Public\u00a0Information\u00a0Officer,\n                                           Vice\u00adPresident's\u00a0Secretariat,\n                                           New\u00a0Delhi.\n\n\n                                           CPIO,\u00a0Rajya\u00a0Sabha\u00a0Secretariat,\n                                           Parliament\u00a0House\u00a0Annexe,\n                                           New\u00a0Delhi.\n\n\n\n         One\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Appellant,\u00a0Shri\u00a0Raghavendra\u00a0Rao\u00a0was\u00a0present.\n\n         On\u00a0behalf\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Respondent,\u00a0the\u00a0following\u00a0were\u00a0present:\u00ad<\/pre>\n
CIC\/WB\/A\/2010\/000279,\u00a0280,\u00a0281\u00a0&\u00a0283\n<\/p>\n
          (i)      Shri\u00a0Deepak\u00a0Goyal,\u00a0JS\u00a0&\u00a0AA,\n<\/p>\n
         (ii)     Shri\u00a0Prem\u00a0Singh,\u00a0DD,\n<\/p>\n
         (iii)    Shri\u00a0Sundip\u00a0\u00a0Misra,\u00a0Assistant\u00a0Director,\n<\/p>\n
         (iv)     Shri\u00a0Ashok\u00a0Dewan,\n<\/p>\n
         (v)      Shri\u00a0Mahitab\u00a0Singh,\n<\/p>\n
         (vi)     Shri\u00a0Pawan\u00a0Singh<\/p>\n
Chief\u00a0Information\u00a0Commissioner                   :       Shri\u00a0Satyananda\u00a0Mishra<\/p>\n
2.       Four\u00a0identical\u00a0second\u00a0appeals\u00a0had\u00a0been\u00a0fixed\u00a0for\u00a0hearing\u00a0today.\u00a0Only\u00a0<\/p>\n
one \u00a0 Appellant \u00a0 out \u00a0 of \u00a0 the \u00a0 four \u00a0 appeared \u00a0 before \u00a0 us. \u00a0 The \u00a0 Respondents \u00a0 also\u00a0<\/p>\n
appeared.\u00a0We\u00a0heard\u00a0their\u00a0submissions.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
3.       In \u00a0 identical \u00a0 applications \u00a0 addressed \u00a0 to \u00a0 the \u00a0 CPIO, \u00a0 the \u00a0 Appellants \u00a0 had\u00a0<\/p>\n
sought\u00a0some\u00a0information\u00a0regarding\u00a0the\u00a0acceptability\u00a0of\u00a0e\u00admail\u00a0as\u00a0a\u00a0medium\u00a0of\u00a0<\/p>\n
representation\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0VP\u00a0of\u00a0India\/Chairman,\u00a0Rajya\u00a0Sabha,\u00a0the\u00a0modalities\u00a0for\u00a0<\/p>\n
meeting \u00a0 personally \u00a0 the \u00a0 VP\/Chairman, \u00a0 Rajya \u00a0 Sabha \u00a0 and \u00a0 the \u00a0 information\u00a0<\/p>\n
regarding\u00a0the\u00a0availability\u00a0of\u00a0any\u00a0forum\u00a0where\u00a0an\u00a0employee\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Rajya\u00a0Sabha\u00a0<\/p>\n
Secretariat\u00a0can\u00a0make\u00a0a\u00a0direct\u00a0representation\u00a0before\u00a0the\u00a0VP\/Chairman,\u00a0Rajya\u00a0<\/p>\n
Sabha.\u00a0Although\u00a0the\u00a0CPIO\u00a0had\u00a0provided\u00a0some\u00a0information\u00a0by\u00a0himself\u00a0and\u00a0the\u00a0<\/p>\n
Appellate\u00a0Authority\u00a0had\u00a0offered\u00a0some\u00a0further\u00a0clarifications\u00a0on\u00a0these\u00a0queries,\u00a0the\u00a0<\/p>\n
Appellant\u00a0submitted\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0copies\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0file\u00a0notings\u00a0relating\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0manner\u00a0in\u00a0<\/p>\n
which\u00a0their\u00a0representations\u00a0had\u00a0been\u00a0considered\u00a0and\u00a0disposed\u00a0of\u00a0had\u00a0not\u00a0been\u00a0<\/p>\n
provided\u00a0to\u00a0them\u00a0in\u00a0their\u00a0entirety.\u00a0Besides,\u00a0he\u00a0also\u00a0submitted\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0CPIO\u00a0did\u00a0<\/p>\n
not\u00a0very\u00a0clearly\u00a0mention\u00a0if\u00a0an\u00a0employee\u00a0could\u00a0send\u00a0a\u00a0representation\u00a0through\u00a0an\u00a0<\/p>\n
e\u00admail\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0VP\/Chairman,\u00a0Rajya\u00a0Sabha.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
4.       The \u00a0 Respondents \u00a0 clarified \u00a0 that \u00a0 all \u00a0 available \u00a0 information \u00a0 had \u00a0 already\u00a0<\/p>\n
been \u00a0 provided \u00a0 to \u00a0 the \u00a0 Appellants \u00a0 and \u00a0 the \u00a0 relevant \u00a0 file \u00a0 in \u00a0 which \u00a0 their\u00a0<\/p>\n
CIC\/WB\/A\/2010\/000279,\u00a0280,\u00a0281\u00a0&\u00a0283
\n representations\u00a0had\u00a0been\u00a0dealt\u00a0with\u00a0was\u00a0also\u00a0shown\u00a0to\u00a0two\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Appellants\u00a0<\/p>\n
including\u00a0the\u00a0one\u00a0present\u00a0during\u00a0the\u00a0present\u00a0hearing.\u00a0It\u00a0was\u00a0further\u00a0submitted\u00a0<\/p>\n
that\u00a0later\u00a0some\u00a0pages\u00a0were\u00a0found\u00a0to\u00a0be\u00a0missing\u00a0from\u00a0that\u00a0file\u00a0since\u00a0the\u00a0date\u00a0of\u00a0<\/p>\n
inspection.\u00a0On\u00a0our\u00a0request,\u00a0the\u00a0relevant\u00a0file\u00a0was\u00a0shown\u00a0to\u00a0us\u00a0and\u00a0we\u00a0found\u00a0that\u00a0<\/p>\n
the\u00a0pages\u00a0from\u00a011\u00a0to\u00a044\u00a0were\u00a0missing\u00a0from\u00a0it.\u00a0We\u00a0consider\u00a0this\u00a0to\u00a0be\u00a0a\u00a0serious\u00a0<\/p>\n
matter.\u00a0We\u00a0feel\u00a0that\u00a0the\u00a0loss\u00a0of\u00a0so\u00a0many\u00a0pages\u00a0from\u00a0the\u00a0file\u00a0should\u00a0be\u00a0enquired\u00a0<\/p>\n
into\u00a0and\u00a0responsibility\u00a0fixed.\u00a0Therefore,\u00a0we\u00a0direct\u00a0the\u00a0CPIO\u00a0to\u00a0bring\u00a0this\u00a0fact\u00a0to\u00a0<\/p>\n
the\u00a0notice\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0competent\u00a0authority\u00a0within\u00a0the\u00a0Rajya\u00a0Sabha\u00a0Secretariat\u00a0for\u00a0him\u00a0<\/p>\n
to\u00a0decide\u00a0the\u00a0manner\u00a0and\u00a0modality\u00a0of\u00a0enquiring\u00a0into\u00a0this\u00a0matter.\u00a0The\u00a0outcome\u00a0of\u00a0<\/p>\n
the\u00a0enquiry\u00a0shall\u00a0be\u00a0reported\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0CIC\u00a0within\u00a0two\u00a0months\u00a0of\u00a0receiving\u00a0this\u00a0<\/p>\n
order.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
5.       In\u00a0regard\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0acceptability\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0e\u00admail\u00a0as\u00a0a\u00a0medium\u00a0of\u00a0making\u00a0a\u00a0<\/p>\n
representation\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0VP\u00a0of\u00a0India\/Chairman,\u00a0Rajya\u00a0Sabha,\u00a0we\u00a0direct\u00a0the\u00a0CPIO\u00a0of\u00a0<\/p>\n
the\u00a0Rajya\u00a0Sabha\u00a0Secretariat\u00a0to\u00a0clarify\u00a0this\u00a0matter\u00a0within\u00a010\u00a0working\u00a0days\u00a0from\u00a0<\/p>\n
the\u00a0receipt\u00a0of\u00a0this\u00a0order\u00a0based\u00a0on\u00a0the\u00a0available\u00a0instructions\/guidelines\u00a0in\u00a0this\u00a0<\/p>\n
regard.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
6.       We \u00a0 understand\u00a0 that \u00a0 the \u00a0 representations\u00a0 filed \u00a0 by \u00a0 the \u00a0 Appellants\u00a0 have\u00a0<\/p>\n
since\u00a0been\u00a0considered\u00a0by\u00a0the\u00a0competent\u00a0authority\u00a0and\u00a0resolved.\u00a0It\u00a0is\u00a0also\u00a0noted\u00a0<\/p>\n
that\u00a0as\u00a0far\u00a0as\u00a0the\u00a0Vice\u00a0President’s\u00a0office\u00a0is\u00a0concerned,\u00a0the\u00a0CPIO\u00a0had\u00a0provided\u00a0<\/p>\n
complete\u00a0and\u00a0adequate\u00a0information.\u00a0Thus,\u00a0there\u00a0is\u00a0no\u00a0further\u00a0information\u00a0to\u00a0be\u00a0<\/p>\n
given \u00a0 in \u00a0 this \u00a0 case \u00a0 other \u00a0 than \u00a0 the \u00a0 above. \u00a0 The \u00a0 appeals \u00a0 are \u00a0 disposed \u00a0 of\u00a0<\/p>\n
accordingly.\u00a0\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
7.       Copies\u00a0of\u00a0this\u00a0order\u00a0be\u00a0given\u00a0free\u00a0of\u00a0cost\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0parties.<\/p>\n
CIC\/WB\/A\/2010\/000279,\u00a0280,\u00a0281\u00a0&\u00a0283
\n                                                               (Satyananda\u00a0Mishra)
\n                                                Chief\u00a0Information\u00a0Commissioner<\/p>\n
        Authenticated\u00a0true\u00a0copy.\u00a0\u00a0Additional\u00a0copies\u00a0of\u00a0orders\u00a0shall\u00a0be\u00a0supplied\u00a0against\u00a0
\napplication\u00a0and\u00a0payment\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0charges\u00a0prescribed\u00a0under\u00a0the\u00a0Act\u00a0to\u00a0the\u00a0CPIO\u00a0of\u00a0this\u00a0
\nCommission.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                                                        (Vijay\u00a0Bhalla)
\n                                                                    Deputy\u00a0Registrar<\/p>\n
CIC\/WB\/A\/2010\/000279,\u00a0280,\u00a0281\u00a0&\u00a0283\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission Mr. Raghavendra Rao Editor vs Vice-President Secratariat on 29 March, 2011 Central\u00a0Information\u00a0Commission,\u00a0New\u00a0Delhi File\u00a0No.CIC\/WB\/A\/2010\/000279,\u00a0280,\u00a0281\u00a0&\u00a0283 Right\u00a0to\u00a0Information\u00a0Act\u00ad2005\u00adUnder\u00a0Section\u00a0\u00a0(19) Date\u00a0of\u00a0hearing : 29\u00a0March\u00a02011 Date\u00a0of\u00a0decision : 29\u00a0March\u00a02011 Name\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Appellant\u00a0 : Shri\u00a0Vipin\u00a0Kumar Editor,\u00a0Room\u00a0No.\u00a0221, Rajya\u00a0Sabha\u00a0Secretariat, Parliament\u00a0House\u00a0Annexe,\u00a0New\u00a0Delhi. Shri\u00a0Rajesh\u00a0Kumar\u00a0Bhardwaj Editor,\u00a0Room\u00a0No.\u00a0225,\u00a0 Rajya\u00a0Sabha\u00a0Secretariat, Parliament\u00a0House\u00a0Annexe,\u00a0New\u00a0Delhi. Smt.\u00a0Nirupa\u00a0Belwal Editor,\u00a0Room\u00a0No.\u00a0221,\u00a0 Rajya\u00a0Sabha\u00a0Secretariat, Parliament\u00a0House\u00a0Annexe,\u00a0New\u00a0Delhi. Shri\u00a0Raghvendra\u00a0Rao, Editor,\u00a0Room\u00a0No.\u00a0225, Rajya\u00a0Sabha\u00a0Secretariat, Parliament\u00a0House\u00a0Annexe,\u00a0New\u00a0Delhi. Name\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Public\u00a0Authority\u00a0\u00a0 : Central\u00a0Public\u00a0Information\u00a0Officer, Vice\u00adPresident’s\u00a0Secretariat, New\u00a0Delhi. CPIO,\u00a0Rajya\u00a0Sabha\u00a0Secretariat, Parliament\u00a0House\u00a0Annexe, New\u00a0Delhi. One\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Appellant,\u00a0Shri\u00a0Raghavendra\u00a0Rao\u00a0was\u00a0present. On\u00a0behalf\u00a0of\u00a0the\u00a0Respondent,\u00a0the\u00a0following\u00a0were\u00a0present:\u00ad CIC\/WB\/A\/2010\/000279,\u00a0280,\u00a0281\u00a0&\u00a0283 (i) Shri\u00a0Deepak\u00a0Goyal,\u00a0JS\u00a0&\u00a0AA, (ii) […]<\/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":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-25379","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nMr. Raghavendra Rao Editor vs Vice-President Secratariat on 29 March, 2011 - 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\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mr. Raghavendra Rao Editor vs Vice-President Secratariat on 29 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-03-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-11-19T18:46:42+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mr. Raghavendra Rao Editor vs Vice-President Secratariat on 29 March, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-19T18:46:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011\"},\"wordCount\":585,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011\",\"name\":\"Mr. Raghavendra Rao Editor vs Vice-President Secratariat on 29 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-19T18:46:42+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mr. Raghavendra Rao Editor vs Vice-President Secratariat on 29 March, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Mr. Raghavendra Rao Editor vs Vice-President Secratariat on 29 March, 2011 - 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\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mr. Raghavendra Rao Editor vs Vice-President Secratariat on 29 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-03-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-11-19T18:46:42+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mr. Raghavendra Rao Editor vs Vice-President Secratariat on 29 March, 2011","datePublished":"2011-03-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-19T18:46:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011"},"wordCount":585,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011","name":"Mr. Raghavendra Rao Editor vs Vice-President Secratariat on 29 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-03-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-19T18:46:42+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-raghavendra-rao-editor-vs-vice-president-secratariat-on-29-march-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mr. Raghavendra Rao Editor vs Vice-President Secratariat on 29 March, 2011"}]},{"@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\/25379","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=25379"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25379\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25379"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25379"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25379"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}