IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 203 CWP-7108-2019 (O&M) Decided on :24.07.2025 AJAY KUMAR . .Petitioner Versus STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION AND OTHERS . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI PRESENT: Ms. Sonia Bohal, Advocate for Mr. Suresh Kumar Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Girdhar, AAG, Haryana. **** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (Oral) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though in the impugned order dated 16.01.2019 (Annexure P-18) it has been mentioned that the petitioner can visit the office of the Information Commission to inspect the record relating to his RTI application, information containing 929 pages and the petitioner can get the photocopies of documents free of cost upto 25 pages but for the rest of the pages, the petitioner has to pay the amount which is not correct. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner during the hearing submits that in case, the information beyond 25 pages, if supplied by the Information Commission, by way of photocopy, the petitioner is ready to pay for the same. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents-State submits that all the information containing 929 pages as being sought by the petitioner has been given to the petitioner by the Information Commission by way of photocopy, hence, no further document needs to be supplied to the RIYA 2025.07.25 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-7108-2019 (O&M) -2- petitioner and in case, the petitioner intends to get any information from the Information Commission, she can file an appropriate application under RTI Act, which will be considered by the authorities concerned. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents-State further submits that in case the application filed by the petitioner seeking information is found feasible to be accepted under Right to Information Act, 2005, an appropriate order will be passed and in case the same is not found feasible to be accepted, detailed reasons for rejecting the application of the petitioner will be mentioned in the speaking order. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that keeping in view the statement of learned State counsel, the present petition may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed any further with liberty to the petitioner that in case, any other information is required by the petitioner, he will file an appropriate application for the grant of said information. 6. Ordered accordingly. 7. Pending civil miscellaneous application, if any, stands disposed of. (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE 24.07.2025 Riya Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No RIYA 2025.07.25 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document