Page No.# 1/10 GAHC010207932026 2026:GAU-AS:14651 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5163/2026 SRI NRIPEN MALAKAR S/O LATE HARESH CH. MALAKAR R/O- H/NO. 27 A, SARUMOTORIA, SAMANNAY PATH, DR. ZAKIR HUSSAIN ROAD, P.O. HENGRABARI, GUWAHATI-36,DISTRICT - KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE ADDL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, UZANABAZAR, GUWAHATI-1 2:THE COMMISSIONER STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION ASSAM JURIPAR PANJABARI GUWAHATI-37 3:THE DIRECTOR FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT UZANABAZAR GUWAHATI-1 4:THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER O/O THE DIRECTORATE OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT UZANBAZAR GUWAHATI-1 5:THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER Page No.# 2/10 DIRECTORATE OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT UZANABAZAR GUWAHATI-0 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K K HANDIQUE, B RAJBONGSHI,P SINHA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR D DEKA, SC, ASSAM INFORMATION COMMISSION BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 30.09.2026 Heard Mr. K.K. Handique, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. M. Barman, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent no. 1, 3, 4 & 5; and Mr. D. Deka, learned Standing Counsel, Assam Information Commission for the respondent no. 2. 2. It is stated that the petitioner is a person with disability having Unique Disability ID no. AS2520619740027252 issued by the Competent Authority under the provisions of the Rights of Persons with Disability Act, 2016. As per the Certificate, the petitioner suffers from ‘Locomotor Disability’ and the percentage of disability is 45%. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he filed an application under Section 6 of the Right to Information Act [RTI], 2005 on 19.07.2024 before the State Public Information Officer [SPIO], Directorate of Women and Child Development, Assam, Guwahati seeking information in respect of supply of ready to eat food items under the Supplementary Nutrition Programme [SNP] to various Anganwadi Centres and Mini Anganwadi Centres of Assam during the year : 2022-2023. When the SPIO did not furnish the information within the prescribed period of time, the petitioner preferred a 1st Appeal before the 1st Appellate Authority on 27.08.2024 under Section 19[1] of the RTI Act. As the 1st Appellate Authority also did not provide the information the petitioner has asked for, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Assam Information Commission on 14.10.2024 under Section 19[3] of the RTI Act. Page No.# 3/10 4. It is stated that after filing of the 2nd Appeal before the Assam Information Commission, the petitioner received a Letter dated 25.11.2024 from the SPIO stating that the information had already been provided to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the information provided to him was incomplete as certain information sought for by the petitioner was not furnished to him. 5. The Assam Information Commission by a Notice dated 14.02.2026 called for the appearance of the petitioner before the Commission on 20.02.2026 in connection with the 2nd Appeal. Accordingly, the petitioner appeared before the Assam Information Commission on 20.02.2026. In the hearing before the Assam Information Commission, the SPIO had submitted that two documents were not provided to the petitioner and the SPIO made an undertaking before the Assam Information Commission to provide the said two documents immediately. Recording the satisfaction of the petitioner, the Assam Information Commission by an Order dated 20.02.2026 disposed of the 2nd Appeal. 6. It is the case of the writ petitioner that despite giving the undertaking before the Assam Information Commission by the SPIO on 20.02.2026, the two documents had not yet been provided to the petitioner. 7. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is preferred seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus to the respondent authorities, more particularly, the SPIO to furnish the documents to the petitioner in terms of the Order dated 20.02.2026 passed by the Assam Information Commission. 8. Mr. Deka, learned Standing Counsel, Assam Information Commission has submitted that the petitioner has already approached the Assam Information Commission by filing a representation, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the inaction on the part of the SPIO to adhere to the undertaking he had given before the Assam Information Commission on 20.02.2026. Mr. Deka has submitted that the Assam Information Commission is considering the Representation dated 02.09.2026. 9. Section 18 of the RTI Act reads as under :- Page No.# 4/10 18. Powers and functions of Information Commission. - [1] Subject to the provisions of this Act, it shall be the duty of the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, to receive and inquire into a complaint from any person,- [a] who has been unable to submit a request to a Central Public Information Officer, or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, either by reason that no such officer has been appointed under this Act, or because the Central Assistant Public Information Officer or State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has refused to accept his or her application for information or appeal under this Act for forwarding the same to the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer or Senior Officer specified in sub-section [1] of section 19 or the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be; [b] who has been refused access to any information requested under this Act; [c] who has not been given a response to a request for information or access to information within the time limits specified under this Act; [d] who has been required to pay an amount of fee which he or she considers unreasonable; [e] who believes that he or she has been given incomplete, misleading or false information under this Act; and [f] in respect of any other matter relating to requesting or obtaining access to records under this Act. [2] Where the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to inquire into the matter, it may initiate an inquiry in respect thereof. Page No.# 5/10 [3] The Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be shall, while inquiring into any matter under this section, have the same powers as are vested in a civil court while trying a suit under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, in respect of the following matters, namely:- [a] summoning and enforcing the attendance of persons and compel them to give oral or written evidence on oath and to produce the documents or things; [b] requiring the discovery and inspection of documents; [c] receiving evidence on affidavit; [d] requisitioning any public record or copies thereof from any court or office; [e] issuing summons for examination of witnesses or documents; and [f] any other matter which may be prescribed. [4] Notwithstanding anything inconsistent contained in any other Act of Parliament, or the State Legislature, as the case may be, the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may, during the inquiry of any complaint under this Act, examine any record to which this Act applies which is under the control of the public authority, and no such record may be withheld from it on any grounds. 10. This Court in a Judgment and Order dated 12.11.2024 passed in W.P.[C] no. 5132/2024 [Sri Sonadhan Chakma vs. The State of Assam and others], has observed that the State Information Commission, on receipt of a complaint, has the power to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 18 of the RTI Act. The Commission can proceed by taking cognizance of a complaint received from a person, who fulfils the expression, ‘any person’ occurring therein; and who has already exhausted the remedies under Section 6, Section 19[1] and Section 19[3] of the RTI Act, on its own merits by initiating an inquiry as Page No.# 6/10 contemplated under Section 18 if the contents of the complaint falls within any of the categories of sub-section [1] of Section 18 of the RTI Act on reaching a satisfaction that there is reason to inquire into the matter. It has been further observed that the Commission is vested with the powers delineated in sub-sections [3] and [4] of Section 18 of the RTI Act to deal with such a complaint. 11. This Court after an analysis of the provisions of the RTI Act has observed in Sonadhan Chakma [supra] in the following manner :- 28. Sub-section [4] of Section 18 of the RTI Act is with a non-obstante clause and it has given overriding powers to the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, to examine any record during the inquiry of any complaint under the RTI Act; examine any record to which the RTI Act applies which is under the control of the public authority; and no such record may be withheld from the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, on any grounds. * * * * * 31. From the above conspectus, it is evidently clear that the provisions of Section 18 have vital roles to play in enforcement of the directions or orders made by the Central Information Commission of the State Information Commission, as the case may be. A scenario is not difficult to envisage that even after a direction passed by the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission to furnish information to an applicant in a second appeal preferred under Section 19 [3] of the RTI Act the public authority does not to furnish information to the applicant or furnishes information which is incomplete, misleading or false. If in such a situation the provisions of Section 18 are considered to be not operational then the Central Information Commission or the State Page No.# 7/10 Information Commission would be incapable to ensure compliance its own directions or orders and the applicant after exhausting all the remedies under the RTI Act would be left remediless, save and except to approach the High Court to invoke the extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In the considered view of this Court, the RTI Act is not enacted for a such situation to turn a Constitutional court to exercise its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to become a court executing the directions or orders of the Central Information Commission of the State Information Commission passed in their appellate jurisdiction. Noticeably, the powers as are vested in a civil court are vested to the Central Information Commission and the State Information Commission by sub-section [3] of Section 18 only while inquiring into any matter under Section 18, but not while adjudicating an appeal under Section 19. Having regard to the provisions incorporated in Section 18 of the RTI Act this Court is of the considered view that the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission are not powerless and incapable to enforce compliance of its own directions or orders. It is true, as submitted by the learned Standing Counsel, KAAC, that sub-section [8] of Section 19 of the RTI Act has vested the Commission with the power to impose any of the penalties which included the penalty under Section 20, but such imposition of penalty is to be passed in its decision rendered in the appellate order under Section 19 [3]. Clause [a] of sub-section [8] of Section 19 has provided that in its decision to be passed under Section 19, the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, has the power to require the public authority to take any such steps as may be necessary to secure compliance of the provisions of the RTI Act. If after an order passed in an appeal with direction to furnish information and thereafter, the public Page No.# 8/10 authority furnishes information which, according to the applicant, turn out be incomplete, misleading or false then the provision contained in sub- section [8] of Section 19 cannot be made operational as the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, after passing its decision in the appeal under Section 19 would not have the authority invoke it subsequently. 32. By keeping both the expressions, ‘complaint’ and ‘appeal’ in Section 20 separated by ‘or’, it has been made clear that a complaint is separate from an appeal. It has been stipulated in Section 20 that where the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any ‘complaint’ or ‘appeal’ is of the opinion that the concerned Public Information Officer has, without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for information or has not furnished information within the time specified under sub-section [1] of Section 7 or malafidely denied the request for information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or destroyed information which was the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing the information, it can impose a penalty in terms of money, after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, in certain situations, can also recommend disciplinary action against the concerned Public Information Officer. 33. It has been settled in Chief Information Commissioner [supra] that the Central Information Commissioner or the State Information Commissioner have supervisory jurisdiction under Section 18 and the same goes to mean that the Central Information Commission and the Page No.# 9/10 State Information Commission have power, authority and jurisdiction to pass necessary orders to keep the public authorities over whom it exercises jurisdiction within its bounds and can enforce compliance of the provisions of the Right to Information Act for the purpose of accessing information to the applicants, subject to the other limitations provided in the RTI Act. The Central Information Commission and the State Information Commission are statutory authorities established under Section 12 and Section 15 of the RTI Act. The powers and functions of these Information Commissions are well delineated in Section 18, already quoted hereinabove. In Section 18 of the RTI Act the Legislature has incorporated that it shall be duty of these Commissions to receive and inquire into complaint from any person on any of the issues covered by clause [a] to clause [f] of sub-section [1] of Section 18 of the RTI Act. 12. Taking into consideration the facts that an Order has already been passed by the Assam Information Commission, on 20.02.2026, thereby, disposing of the 2nd Appeal with specific observation on the basis of the undertaking given by SPIO before it on 20.02.2026 to provide the information to the applicant, and the petitioner aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the inaction on the part of the SPIO thereafter to adhere to the undertaking he had given before the Assam Information Commission has approached the Assam Information Commission by filing a complaint on 02.09.2026, the Commission may take cognizance of the said complaint on the merits of the complaint. 13. Therefore, in view of availability of such adequate, efficacious and alternative statutory remedy under Section 18 of the RTI Act, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the Assam Information Commission shall examine the Complaint dated 02.09.2026 in terms of the provisions of Section 18[1] of the RTI Act and inquire into the complaint whether it falls within any of the issues covered by Clause [a] to Clause [f] of sub-section [1] of Section 18 of the RTI Act; and dispose of the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as Page No.# 10/10 possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from today. 14. A copy of this order is to be furnished to Mr. D. Deka, learned Standing Counsel, Assam Information Commission for taking steps from his end to communicate the order to the Assam Information Commission. JUDGE Comparing Assistant