IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 348 of 2010. Kanti Ram Joshi S/O Late Parmanand Joshi, at present, posted as District Social Welfare Officer, Narendra Nagar, Tehri Garhwal, District Tehri Garhwal. … Petitioner. Vs. 1. Chief Information Commissioner, C-30, Sector-1, Defence Colony, Dehradun, State of Uttarakhand. 2. Director, Directorate Social Welfare, Haldwani, District Nainital, State of Uttarakhand. 3. Shri B.L.Bhatt, (Editor) Rajiv Gram, 14 Bigha Road, Dhalwala, District Tehri Garhwal, State of Uttarakhand. …Respondents. Mr. Lalit Samant, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate, learned counsel for the respondent no.1. Mr. K.P.Upadhyay, Additional C.S.C., learned counsel for the respondent no.2. Date March 22, 2010. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. (Stay Application No. 1597 of 2010) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. Notice on behalf of the respondent no. 1 is accepted by Mr. Vipul Sharma, advocate and Notice on behalf of the respondent no. 2 is accepted by Mr. K.P.Upadhyay, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 2-3- 2010 passed by the respondent no.1 (Annexure-1 to the petition) whereby a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- has been imposed against the petitioner and initiation of departmental proceeding has also been ordered against him. 2 The only grievance of the petitioner is that no opportunity of hearing was given to him before imposing the penalty against him by the respondent no.1 by his order dated 2-3-2010 passed in Appeal No. A-2129 of 2009, B.L.Bhatt Vs. Public Information Officer/District Social Welfare Officer, Tehri Garhwal and another. According to the petitioner the letter No. 1816 dated 19-2-2010 whereby the petitioner was required to show cause by 2-3-2010 was dispatched on 26-2-2010 and had been received by the petitioner as late as 4-3-2010, while the impugned order had been passed on 2-3-2010 itself. Learned counsel for the petitioner has, therefore, argued that it cannot be said that adequate opportunity of hearing was available to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently urged that the provision of Section 20 of the Act has been violated in the case at hand, because no opportunity of being heard has been given to the petitioner before imposing penalty of Rs. 10,000/- against him by the respondent no.1. Proviso one appended to Section 20 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 makes it obligatory that a reasonable opportunity of being heard shall be given to the Officer concerned before any penalty is imposed against him. In the above facts and circumstances, it is obvious that no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner before passing the impugned orders. As such, there has been violation of principles of natural justice and fair play. The impugned orders are liable to be set aside. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also urged that this Court in Writ Petition No. 246 of 2009 (M/S) L. Fanai Vs. The Uttarakhand Information Commission and another has passed an order 3 dated 26-6-2009 whereby the order of the Information Commission was set aside. The facts of the case at hand are almost similar. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.1 has fairly conceded that the matter was remanded to the Information Commission by order dated 26-6-2009 in Writ Petition No. 246 of 2009 (M/S). In view of the above facts and circumstances, the writ petition deserves to be allowed and is hereby allowed. The impugned orders passed by the respondent no.1 (Annexure- 1 and Annexure-2 to the petition) are set aside. The Information Commission, Uttarakhand is directed to give a personal hearing to the petitioner and, thereafter, the Information Commission may pass suitable order afresh in the matter in accordance with law. The petitioner is directed to appear before the second appellate authority-Chief Information Commissioner, Dehradun on 05- 4-2010. All pending applications stand disposed of. (B.S.Verma,J.) RCP 4