- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29177 WP No. 11377 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 11377 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. DR. NAYANA .N D/O SRI NAGASIDDAN .N AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS WORKING AS DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER SAJEEVINI KARNATAKA STATE RURAL LIVELIHOOD PROMOTION SOCIETY NO.4, MYSUGAR BUILDING J C ROAD, OPP: RAVINDRA KALAKSHETRA BANGALORE-560002. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHAMARAJ .M, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSION MAHITHI SOUDHA, DEVARAJ URS ROAD VIDHANA SOUDHA, WEST GATE-02 BANGALORE-560001. 2. SRI RAMESH KUMAR H M AGED MAJOR R/A NO.737/B, 9TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK 3RD STAGE, BASAVESHWARA NAGAR BANGALORE-560079. 3. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY MISSION DIRECTOR Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29177 WP No. 11377 of 2022 SAJEEVINI KARNATAKA STATE RURAL LIVELIHOOD PROMOTION SOCIETY NO.4, 2ND AND 3RD FLOORS MYSUGAR BUILDING, J C ROAD, OPP RAVINDRA KALAKSHETRA BANGALORE-560002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.B. SHARATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS W.P. FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01.12.2021 PASSED BY THE R-1 STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER, KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSIONER, VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN CASE NO.KIC.6700 APL 2020. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Sri.G.B.Sharath Gowda, learned counsel takes notice for respondent No.1. Registry to print his name in the cause-list. 2. Petitioner, who had assumed charge as Deputy Director, Sanjeevini-Karnataka State Rural Livelihood Promotion Society, has been issued with an order dated 01.12.2021 produced at Annexure-A, passed by respondent No.1 – State Information Commission directing - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29177 WP No. 11377 of 2022 him to pay a penalty of Rs.10,000/- for alleged dereliction of duties contemplated under the Right to Information Act, 2005 in not providing information as sought for by respondent No.2 – private party. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner taking this Court through the records submits that the respondent No.2 had filed an application on 20.12.2019 for inspection of complete files relating to execution of Skill Development Training Programmes (Tender, PIA, Work orders, Numbers of candidates sponsored, Course, Trade, Payments made, Payments pending, Placements and other details) under the Office of the Mission Director, Sanjeevini - Karnataka State Rural Livelihood Promotion Society/National Rural Lively Hood Mission (NRLM) for the year 2019-20. 4. Petitioner had assumed charge of the said Office on 24.06.2021. However, a show cause notice was issued to petitioner on 13.07.2021 attributing dereliction of duty on the part of petitioner and calling upon him to show cause as to why action contemplated under Section 20 of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29177 WP No. 11377 of 2022 the Right to Information Act, 2005 should not be taken by imposing a penalty on him. Though petitioner submitted a reply with sufficient cause stating that he had furnished the information and facilitated inspection of records, respondent-Authority has proceeded to pass the impugned order. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner could not be saddled with liability for the alleged negligence attributed to him, more particularly, as he was not in office prior to June 2021. Therefore, impugned order is not sustainable and seeks for allowing the petition. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records. 7. The application seeking information has been filed on 20.12.2019. Annexure-D indicates that petitioner had assumed charge on 24.06.2021. The show-cause notice was apparently issued on 13.07.2021. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29177 WP No. 11377 of 2022 8. A perusal of impugned order does not indicate any consideration of the aforesaid aspect of the matter namely petitioner having assumed charge on 24.06.2021. The impugned order further does not disclose that respondent No.1-Authority having considered the said fact before proceeding to pass order under Section 20 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 imposing a penalty on the petitioner, as stated above. 9. In that view of the matter, petitioner is at liberty to furnish reply/cause to the respondent Authority, who shall re-consider the same and pass appropriate order. 10. In view of the above, this Court proceeds to pass the following; ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) Impugned order dated 01.12.2021 passed by respondent No.1 - State Information Commissioner vide Annexure-A is set-aside. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29177 WP No. 11377 of 2022 (iii) Matter is remitted to respondent No.1 - State Information Commissioner for reconsideration of the petitioner's case. (iv) Petitioner is at liberty to file his response within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (v) Respondent No.1 - State Information Commissioner shall, thereafter, consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15