IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5782 of 2018 ====================================================== Shahid Parwez Son of Late Nazir Alam, Resident of Village-Station Road, P.S.-Samastipur, District-Samastipur, Bihar, Presently Posted as Additional District Land Acquisition Officer, Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Information Commission, Through The Registrar 2. Shri Akhilesh Kumar Singh, Resident of Shaheed Bhagat Singh Colony, Lahariyaganj, P.S. Sadar, District-Madhubani. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjay Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Ms.Binita Singh, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 11 02-07-2025 Heard Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Binita Singh, learned counsel appearing for the State Information Commission, Patna Bihar. 2. The petitioner, in the present writ application, has prayed for quashing the order dated 15.07.2016 passed by the State Information Commissioner in Case No. 66510/2011-12 as contained in Memo No.4458 dated 20.07.2016 (Annexure-16 whereby and whereunder the State Information Commissioner has imposed a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- upon the petitioner in exercise of power under Section 20(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, for not providing the information to the appellant (Respondent No. 2 herein). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Patna High Court CWJC No.5782 of 2018(11) dt.02-07-2025 2/3 imposition of the penalty and the adverse remarks/strictures made against the petitioner in the impugned order do not appear to be justified and reasonable. 4. Learned counsel representing the State Information Commission points out that the records of the proceedings have been enclosed as Annexure-A to the counter affidavit filed by the State Information Commission and the order-sheet of the date 20.07.2017 clearly indicates that the petitioner has already complied with the impugned order and has deposited the penalty of Rs. 25,000/-, which brought the entire proceedings to an end before the State Information Commission. She, therefore, submits that since the petitioner has already accepted the penalty and deposited the said amount, the present writ application is misconceived and it should be dismissed. 5. The aforesaid submissions made by the State Information Commission about the petitioner depositing the penalty amount of Rs. 25,000/- is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He, however, prays that the present writ application may be disposed of by observing that the remarks/strictures made against the petitioner in the impugned order dated 15.07.2016 passed by the State Information Commissioner may not come in his way of promotion and other Patna High Court CWJC No.5782 of 2018(11) dt.02-07-2025 3/3 benefits. This limited prayer being made by learned counsel for the petitioner is not opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the State Information Commission. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this writ application is disposed of because the petitioner has already deposited the penalty amount of Rs. 25,000/-, with an observation that imposition of penalty vide impugned order dated 15.07.2016 and the remarks/strictures contained therein will not come in the way of petitioner’s promotion and other benefits in future. 7. Accordingly, the Interlocutory Application pending, if any, shall also stand disposed of. perwez (Alok Kumar Sinha, J) U