{"id":5943,"date":"2010-03-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-03-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010"},"modified":"2019-01-27T22:52:10","modified_gmt":"2019-01-27T17:22:10","slug":"shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010","title":{"rendered":"Shri S. P. Ratnani vs Central Information Commission &#8230; on 12 March, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Central Information Commission<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Shri S. P. Ratnani vs Central Information Commission &#8230; on 12 March, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>                 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                  Appeal No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2009\/000140 dated 19-2-2009\n                     Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19\n\nAppellant:           Shri S. P. Ratnani,\nRespondent:          Central Information Commission (CIC)\n                          Decision Announced on 12-3-2010\n\n\nFACTS<\/pre>\n<p>       By an application of 25.6.2008 Shri S. P. Ratnani of Raipur, Chhattisgarh<br \/>\napplied to the Joint Secretary, Central Information Commission, seeking the<br \/>\nfollowing information:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>       &#8220;1.    The CIC is not charging fees for appeals made under RTI<br \/>\n              Act as neither there is such provision in the RTI Act nor<br \/>\n              hence Central Govt. has laid down such fees in the Rules<br \/>\n              framed for the same. Hence requested please give the<br \/>\n              information of legal opinion that whether (i) RTI Act 2005 is<br \/>\n              there a provision of payable\/ charging fees for appeals 1st<br \/>\n              and\/ or 2nd? Related argument is attached sheet, may please<br \/>\n              also be perused.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>       2.     Whether the CIC\/SIC has discretion powers to impose the<br \/>\n              penalty specified in section 20 of RTI Act, 2005 when<br \/>\n              evidently\/ obviously the CPIO\/ SPIO, without any reasonable<br \/>\n              cause, has not furnished the requested information or on<br \/>\n              other grounds, specified in section 20, within prescribed time<br \/>\n              limit of one month u\/s 7 (i). When in view of the word \/shall&#8217;<br \/>\n              (impose) has been used in section 20, and the penalty is<br \/>\n              fixed on day- Rate basis and in preface of RTI Act, the scope<br \/>\n              &amp; object (i.e. intention of the legislation) is to provide<br \/>\n              Transparency &amp; Accountability in the working of every Public<br \/>\n              Authority. In commonly very &#8216;shall&#8217; connotes &#8216;mandatory&#8217;<br \/>\n              having regards to object &amp; scope of the Law. Since<br \/>\n              disobedience of statutory mandate, indicate mandatory<br \/>\n              impose penalty, when under law, rate basis is laid down.<br \/>\n              (Supported by AIR 1974 Mad 160(163): P. Sangili vs. Rama<br \/>\n              Krishnan\/\/1991 (2) GLH 309: Jawant Sing Mathura Singh vs<br \/>\n              And Municipal Corp\/\/UPAIR 1963 SC 1417: Banarasi Das vs.<br \/>\n              Central Commissioner.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>              SBI Cheque no. 930656 492002002 for Rs. 10\/- only<br \/>\n              attached.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>       3.     Whether CIC\/SIC are free to give the decision\/ direction<br \/>\n              other than &#8217;cause of action of appeal&#8217; which generally ought<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                           1<\/span><br \/>\n               to be related for furnishing the requested information only in<br \/>\n              RTI. CIC\/SIC has no concern that for what problem, the<br \/>\n              applicant\/ appellant has sought the information i.e. CIC\/SIC<br \/>\n              give the instruction to the CPIO\/SPIO to solve that problem<br \/>\n              instead of ordering to furnish the requested information<br \/>\n              section 6 (2). Please confirm and\/ or clearly (supported by<br \/>\n              AIR 1973 Raj (52)55: govt. cannot go beyond the terms of<br \/>\n              reference, out of jurisdiction so vested).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>      4.      Under RTI Act, there is no provision to reject the appeal but<br \/>\n              only the application (means made u\/s 6 (1) can be finally<br \/>\n              rejected by CIC\/SIC on the basis of the section 19 (8) (b),<br \/>\n              which also ought to be read with section 7 (1) and section 8<br \/>\n              &amp; 9 of RTI Act. Please confirm and for clearly.&#8217;<\/p>\n<p>      To this, Shri S. P. Ratnani received a response dated 4.7.2008 from CPIO<br \/>\nShri Tarun Kumar, Jt. Secretary, CIC point wise as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>       &#8220;(1)   The Central Information Commission is only the highest<br \/>\n              appellate authority under the RTI Act, 2005. It is not the<br \/>\n              executing agency of the RTI Act. The executing agency of<br \/>\n              the RTI Act is govt. of India. Further, information can be<br \/>\n              provided as defined under section 2 (f) of the RTI Act, 2005<br \/>\n              and information that is available with the CPIO can be given.<br \/>\n              Moreover, the CPIO is not competent to interpret the RTI Act.<br \/>\n              He can only provide information that is available in his<br \/>\n              custody.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      (2)     You are seeking a legal opinion for which the CPIO is not<br \/>\n              competent to provide any information as he cannot interpret<br \/>\n              the RTI Act, 2005.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      (3)     The question is hypothetical and involves interpretation of<br \/>\n              the RTI Act, 2005.          The CPIO, Central Information<br \/>\n              Commission is not competent to do the same.<br \/>\n      (4)     The question raised seeking clarification and interpretation of<br \/>\n              the RTI Act, 2005 which the CPIO is not competent to do.<br \/>\n              The CPIO can give you information as defined under section<br \/>\n              2 (f) of the RTI Act, 2005. HE cannot interpret or clarify legal<br \/>\n              issues relating to the RTI Act, 2005.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      It is clarified that &#8216;legal opinion&#8217; referred to point (iii) of this office<br \/>\n      letter dated 2.6.2008 means an opinion of any expert of law or RTI<br \/>\n      outside the Commission.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      Since no information is being provided to you, your cheque is being<br \/>\n      returned in original to you.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                          2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>        Aggrieved Shri Ratnani moved an appeal before then Appellate Authority<br \/>\nShri Mohammed Haleem Khan on 30.7.08 pleading as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>        &#8220;It is humbly prayed that the non-appellant may kindly be advised<br \/>\n       to provide the requested information free within 15 days.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>       He has, in describing his grounds for this prayer contested the response<br \/>\ngiven against each of the points by CPIO. Upon this, Secretary Shri Mohammed<br \/>\nHaleem Khan, through his order of 25.9.08 directed as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>        &#8220;CPIO is legally bound to provide information which is available in<br \/>\n       the Commission, however, to avoid further correspondence\/ appeal<br \/>\n       in the matter, it is decided that CPIO will offer the applicant<br \/>\n       inspection of the records and files available in the Commission on<br \/>\n       the subject, if any, and also provide the copies of the documents\/<br \/>\n       files etc which appellant may choose to take copies of as per rules.<br \/>\n       The Act was framed by the Central Government and the records<br \/>\n       relating to the due diligence on various aspects of provisions of the<br \/>\n       Act should be with them. The appellant may, therefore, seek the<br \/>\n       information from the concerned public authority, that is, Ministry of<br \/>\n       Personnel, Public Grievances &amp; Pension.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>       Appellant Shri S. P. Ratnani has then moved a second appeal before us<br \/>\nwith the following prayer:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>       &#8220;1.    Provide the sought information within 15days.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>       2.     Compensation of expenses Rs. 500\/-.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>       3.     To penalise u\/s 20 of RTI.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>       The appeal was heard through videoconference on 12-3-2010. The<br \/>\nfollowing are present.\n<\/p>\n<p>       Appellant at NIC Studio, Raipur, Chhattisgarh<br \/>\n             Shri S. P. Ratnani.\n<\/p>\n<p>       Respondents at CIC, New Delhi<br \/>\n             Ms. Anita Gupta, Appellate Authority<br \/>\n             Shri Tarun Kumar, CPIO<\/p>\n<p>       CPIO Shri Tarun Kumar submitted that what appellant Shri Ratnani has<br \/>\nsought is legal advice which cannot be provided by the CPIO. Appellant Shri S. P.<br \/>\nRatnani, on the other hand argued that what he has sought in each of his four<br \/>\nquestions is the legal opinion of the Commission on each of the four points that he<br \/>\nhas raised.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                        3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                                 DECISION NOTICE<br \/>\n       Section 2 (f) of the RTI Act reads as follows;-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>             2(f)&#8217;information&#8217; means any material in any form,<br \/>\n             including records, documents, memos, e-mails,<br \/>\n             opinions, advices, press releases, circulars,<br \/>\n             orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers,<br \/>\n             samples, models, data material held in any<br \/>\n             electronic form and information relating to any<br \/>\n             private body which can be accessed by a public<br \/>\n             authority under any other law for the time being<br \/>\n             in force;&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>       In other words information, to qualify as &#8220;information&#8221; under the RTI Act,<br \/>\n2005 must be held in material form, if it is to be provided to an applicant under<br \/>\nsection 2 (j) of the Act. In this context, during the hearing each of the questions<br \/>\nasked by appellant in his initial application has a bearing on specific issues<br \/>\npertaining to the RTI Act on which the Commission has taken decisions, except<br \/>\nquestion No. 1, to which the answer is clearly &#8220;No&#8221;. This and other answers can,<br \/>\ntherefore, be provided to appellant simply by providing to him a copy of a<br \/>\ndecision of this Commission, preferably in Full Bench which will constitute the<br \/>\nlegal opinion held by the Commission on this specific matter.\n<\/p>\n<p>       This is apparently what appellate authority has allowed in his order of<br \/>\n25.9.08, and an offer subsequently made by CPIO in compliance as reported by<br \/>\nhim in the hearing. However, this is an unnecessarily circuitous solution, since it<br \/>\nwill place on the appellant the impossible responsibility of tracing opinions from out<br \/>\nof the decisions of this Commission, now myriad. It is the CPIO who is better<br \/>\nequipped to do so. For this reason the decision of First Appellate Authority Shri<br \/>\nMohammed Haleem Khan is set aside. The appeal is allowed. CPIO Shri Tarun<br \/>\nKumar will now, in answer to question nos. 2, 3 &amp; 4, send to appellant Shri S. P.<br \/>\nRatnani, a copy of the decision of the CIC in each of the questions asked, within 15<br \/>\nworking days of the date of receipt of this decision notice. There will be no costs.<br \/>\nIn this context, since we have found that appellant Shri Ratnani had indeed asked<br \/>\nfor information, quite clearly the refund of fee by CPIO Shri Tarun Kumar was not<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         4<\/span><br \/>\n required. However, since the information was not supplied within the prescribed<br \/>\ntime, it will now be free as mandated u\/s 7(6) of the Act<\/p>\n<p>       Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to<br \/>\nthe parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>(Wajahat Habibullah)<br \/>\nChief Information Commissioner<br \/>\n12-3-2010<\/p>\n<p>Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against<br \/>\napplication and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of<br \/>\nthis Commission.\n<\/p>\n<p>(Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar)<br \/>\nJoint Registrar<br \/>\n12-3-2010<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         5<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Central Information Commission Shri S. P. Ratnani vs Central Information Commission &#8230; on 12 March, 2010 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal No. CIC\/WB\/A\/2009\/000140 dated 19-2-2009 Right to Information Act 2005 &#8211; Section 19 Appellant: Shri S. P. Ratnani, Respondent: Central Information Commission (CIC) Decision Announced on 12-3-2010 FACTS By an application of 25.6.2008 Shri S. P. [&hellip;]<\/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-5943","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Shri S. P. Ratnani vs Central Information Commission ... on 12 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri S. P. Ratnani vs Central Information Commission ... on 12 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-03-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-01-27T17:22:10+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=\"7 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-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri S. P. Ratnani vs Central Information Commission &#8230; on 12 March, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-27T17:22:10+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1432,\"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\\\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010\",\"name\":\"Shri S. P. Ratnani vs Central Information Commission ... on 12 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-27T17:22:10+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri S. P. Ratnani vs Central Information Commission &#8230; on 12 March, 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 S. P. Ratnani vs Central Information Commission ... on 12 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri S. P. Ratnani vs Central Information Commission ... on 12 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-03-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-01-27T17:22:10+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri S. P. Ratnani vs Central Information Commission &#8230; on 12 March, 2010","datePublished":"2010-03-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-27T17:22:10+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010"},"wordCount":1432,"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\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010","name":"Shri S. P. Ratnani vs Central Information Commission ... on 12 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-03-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-27T17:22:10+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-s-p-ratnani-vs-central-information-commission-on-12-march-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri S. P. Ratnani vs Central Information Commission &#8230; on 12 March, 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\/5943","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=5943"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5943\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5943"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5943"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5943"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}