The Chhattisgarh High Court has set aside a ₹25,000 penalty imposed on a Public Information Officer under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, holding that such a penalty cannot stand unless deliberate and mala fide withholding of information is clearly established.
Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad passed the order on September 3, 2026, in a writ petition challenging an order of the Chhattisgarh State Information Commission.
Background of the Case
The proceedings arose from an RTI application filed on January 25, 2022, seeking information concerning Gram Panchayat Pachheda for the financial years 2014-15 to 2020-21. The information sought included details of achievements and goals, debit and credit accounts, bank statements of funds, ODPF-declared villages and certified copies of beneficiary utilisation certificates.
The applicant later filed a first appeal alleging that the information had not been provided. After the appeal was not disposed of, a second appeal was filed before the State Information Commission.
The petitioner told the Commission that the original RTI application had never been served on or received by her. She submitted a detailed reply after receiving a show-cause notice. Despite this, the Commission held that the information had been withheld without reasonable cause and imposed a ₹25,000 penalty under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act.
Court's Observation
The High Court examined whether the statutory requirements for imposing the penalty had been satisfied.
The Court noted that Section 20 of the RTI Act requires a clear finding that the Public Information Officer deliberately and mala fide withheld the documents before a penalty can be imposed.
"Under Section 20 of the RTI Act, the imposition of penalty or a recommendation of disciplinary action requires a categorical finding that the documents were withheld due to the deliberate and malafide acts of the Public Information Officer. Unless such a finding is recorded in the order supported by cogent reasons, the imposition of penalty is unsustainable in law."
The Court further found that, on the facts before it, there was a complete absence of mala fide or deliberate failure by the petitioner. It relied on the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Manohar S/o Manikrao Anchule v. State of Maharashtra and another.
Decision
The High Court allowed the petition and set aside the Chhattisgarh State Information Commission's order dated November 7, 2023, which had imposed the ₹25,000 penalty.
The petition was accordingly finally disposed of.
Case Details:
Case Title: Radhika Sidar v. Chhattisgarh State Information Commission & Ors.
Case Number: WPC No. 2353 of 2024
Judge: Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Decision Date: September 3, 2026
