{"id":348028,"date":"2025-05-16T11:00:18","date_gmt":"2025-05-16T05:30:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=348028"},"modified":"2025-05-20T09:17:39","modified_gmt":"2025-05-20T03:47:39","slug":"kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/","title":{"rendered":"Public Information Officer neither has power nor duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7 of Right to Information Act: Kerala High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Kerala High Court:<\/span> In a writ petition filed by Principal, MSM College seeking to direct the University of Kerala to approve his appointment, the Single Judge Bench of N. Nagaresh, J. held that a Public Information Officer was not legally empowered or obligated under Section 7<\/a> of the Right to Information Act, 2005<\/a>, to initiate an investigation in the absence of a specific complaint or authority to do so. The Court observed that since the petitioner was not the competent officer to address the complaint and no specific allegation regarding a forged document had been received, the PIO had no duty to investigate the matter.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the Court directed the University of Kerala to confirm the provisional approval of the petitioner’s appointment, as granted by the University’s order dated 03-06-2024.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The petitioner stated that a vacancy for the post of Principal arose on 01-06-2022, and a duly constituted Selection Committee, including University nominees, selected the petitioner for the position. The petitioner was appointed as Principal via letter and a proposal for approval was sent to the University on 09-11-2023. Prior to this, the petitioner had been appointed as Drawing and Disbursing Officer (‘DDO’) with effect from 01-09-2023.<\/p>\n

A controversy later arose regarding the admission of a student. The petitioner, serving as Public Information Officer at the time, received an RTI application seeking information about the student’s degree certificate. The petitioner informed the applicant that the genuineness of the certificate had to be verified by Kalinga University.<\/p>\n

As the information sought under subsequent RTI applications was third-party information, the petitioner followed due process under Section 11<\/a> of the RTI Act<\/a> and denied disclosure based on the student’s refusal to provide consent.<\/p>\n

It was subsequently found that the degree certificate from Kalinga University was fake. The petitioner contended that the student was admitted on 28-01-2022 when another individual was Principal, and the petitioner had no role in the admission process. Despite this, a show-cause notice dated 05-09-2023 was issued to the petitioner, who submitted a detailed reply on 16-09-2023.<\/p>\n

Thereafter, the University decided to withdraw its approval of the petitioner as Principal-in-Charge and issued a letter to initiate disciplinary action. The petitioner challenged this on the ground that he was never formally appointed as Principal-in-Charge and had been selected as Principal through a proper process on 07-11-2023. The withdrawal of approval was alleged to be arbitrary and motivated by an intent to obstruct the petitioner’s appointment.<\/p>\n

Upon admission of the writ petition, the High Court passed an interim order directing that the petitioner be permitted to continue as Principal provisionally, subject to the outcome of the writ petition.<\/p>\n

Analysis and Decision<\/h3>\n

The Court noted that there was no dispute regarding the petitioner’s appointment as Principal of the College, which had been made following a due selection process. It was observed that, at the time when the petitioner was serving as the Public Information Officer and received RTI applications, he had acted in accordance with the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005<\/a>. There was no negligence or default on the part of the petitioner in processing or disposing of the RTI applications. The allegation made was that the petitioner ought to have investigated the issues raised in the RTI applications. However, the Court held that since the petitioner was not the competent authority to deal with such complaints, and no specific complaint alleging submission of forged documents had been received, the petitioner was under no legal obligation to initiate an investigation.<\/p>\n

It further held that a Public Information Officer neither had the power nor the duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7<\/a> of the Right to Information Act, 2005<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court said that even if it were to assume some degree of negligence on the part of the petitioner, an isolated instance of such alleged negligence could not be a valid ground to deny approval of the petitioner’s appointment as Principal, especially when the appointment had been made following a due selection process.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that a statement filed by the University indicated that, pursuant to the interim order of the Court, the University had issued an order dated 03-06-2024 granting provisional approval to the petitioner’s appointment as Principal.<\/p>\n

In light of the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the University to confirm the provisional approval of appointment granted to the petitioner as per the University’s order dated 03-06-2024.<\/p>\n

[Dr Muhammed Thaha v. The Director of Collegiate Education, 2025 SCC OnLine Ker 3301<\/a>, decided on 13-05-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For Petitioner:<\/span> ADVS. NISHA GEORGE GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.) A.L. NAVANEETH KRISHNAN<\/p>\n

For Respondent:<\/span> ADV. SRI. THOMAS ABRAHAM, STANDING COUNSEL<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“Assuming that there is negligence on the part of the petitioner to that extent, an isolated instance of negligence as alleged against the petitioner cannot be a reason to decline approval to the appointment of the petitioner as Principal which was made after a due selection process.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67512,"featured_media":316393,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[82113,2523,35477,13821,82114,22804],"class_list":["post-348028","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-inquiry-powers","tag-Kerala_High_Court","tag-public-information-officer","tag-rti-act","tag-rti-obligations","tag-section-7"],"yoast_head":"\nKerala High Court: PIO Has No Power or Duty to Inquire Under Section 7 of RTI Act | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Kerala High Court held that a Public Information Officer has neither the power nor the duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Public Information Officer neither has power nor duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7 of Right to Information Act: Kerala High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Kerala High Court held that a Public Information Officer has neither the power nor the duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-05-16T05:30:18+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-05-20T03:47:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Public Information Officer neither has power nor duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7 of Right to Information Act: Kerala High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/\",\"name\":\"Kerala High Court: PIO Has No Power or Duty to Inquire Under Section 7 of RTI Act | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-05-16T05:30:18+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-05-20T03:47:39+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\"},\"description\":\"Kerala High Court held that a Public Information Officer has neither the power nor the duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Kerala High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Public Information Officer neither has power nor duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7 of Right to Information Act: Kerala High Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\",\"name\":\"Apoorva\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Apoorva\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Kerala High Court: PIO Has No Power or Duty to Inquire Under Section 7 of RTI Act | SCC Times","description":"Kerala High Court held that a Public Information Officer has neither the power nor the duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Public Information Officer neither has power nor duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7 of Right to Information Act: Kerala High Court","og_description":"Kerala High Court held that a Public Information Officer has neither the power nor the duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-05-16T05:30:18+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-05-20T03:47:39+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Apoorva","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Public Information Officer neither has power nor duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7 of Right to Information Act: Kerala High Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Apoorva","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/","name":"Kerala High Court: PIO Has No Power or Duty to Inquire Under Section 7 of RTI Act | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp","datePublished":"2025-05-16T05:30:18+00:00","dateModified":"2025-05-20T03:47:39+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9"},"description":"Kerala High Court held that a Public Information Officer has neither the power nor the duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7 of the Right to Information Act, 2005.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Kerala High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/kerala-high-court-rti-section-7-public-information-officer-inquiry\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Public Information Officer neither has power nor duty to conduct an inquiry under Section 7 of Right to Information Act: Kerala High Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9","name":"Apoorva","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Apoorva"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":272286,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/25\/diary-civil-criminal-proceedings-rti-kerala-highcourt-constitutional-validity-legal-research-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":348028,"position":0},"title":"‘A’ diary of civil & criminal proceedings cannot be obtained by filing RTI; Kerala HC upholds constitutional validity of Rule 12 of RTI (Subordinate Courts and Tribunals) Rules, 2006","author":"Editor","date":"August 25, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Kerala High Court: In a case challenging the validity of Rule 12 of the Right to Information (Subordinate Courts and Tribunals) Rules, 2006, Murali Purushothaman, J., held that Rule 12 is not inconsistent with Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and the provisions of the Right to Information Act,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Kerala High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/kerla_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":355841,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/06\/cochin-international-airport-cial-is-public-authority-rti-kerala-high-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":348028,"position":1},"title":"Cochin International Airport Authority is a \u2018public authority\u2019 under RTI Act: Kerala High Court","author":"Apoorva","date":"August 6, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court concluded that all three limbs of Section 2(h)(d)(i) of the RTI Act \u2014 ownership, control, and substantial financing, stood satisfied in the case of CIAL. Hence, CIAL was held to be a \"public authority\" within the meaning of the Right to Information Act, 2005, and was amenable to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"CIAL is public authority","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/CIAL-is-public-authority-.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/CIAL-is-public-authority-.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/CIAL-is-public-authority-.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/CIAL-is-public-authority-.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":337707,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/12\/21\/kerala-hc-holds-charitable-society-members-nazareth-pharmacy-college-to-be-public-servants-pc-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":348028,"position":2},"title":"Kerala High Court holds Charitable Society Members running Nazareth Pharmacy College to be \u2018public servants\u2019 under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988","author":"Editor","date":"December 21, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIf the \u2018State function\u2019 or \u2018public function\u2019 is discharged under a legal obligation or by a governmental or statutory direction, such \u2018State function\u2019 is treated as \u2018public duty\u2019.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Kerala High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":344116,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/21\/kerala-high-court-directs-state-to-formulate-guidelines-for-complainant-anonymity-posh-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":348028,"position":3},"title":"Kerala HC directs State to formulate guidelines for ensuring complainant’s anonymity from public domain during inquiry under POSH Act","author":"Apoorva","date":"March 21, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Recognising the right to privacy as one of the fundamental rights of an individual, the Court noted that a complainant raising such grievances is entitled to ensure that her identity and whereabouts are kept anonymised from the public domain.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Kerala High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Kerala-High-Court-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":239119,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/12\/cic-sri-vedapureeswarar-sri-varadarajaperumal-devsthanama-cannot-be-deemed-as-a-public-authority-under-s-2h-of-rti-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":348028,"position":4},"title":"CIC | Sri Vedapureeswarar Sri Varadarajaperumal Devsthanama cannot be deemed as a public authority under S. 2(h) of RTI Act","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 12, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Central Information Commission (CIC):\u00a0Divya Prakash Sinha (Information Commissioner) considered whether Sri Vedapureeswarar Sri Varadarajaperumal Devsthanama will be a public authority under Section 2(h) of Right to Information Act. M. Vaikunth, Counsel for the respondent stated that Sri Vedapureeswarar Sri Varadarajaperumal Devsthanam, Pondicherry is not a Public Authority under Section 2(h)\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":215113,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/05\/28\/ker-hc-specific-allegation-of-gesture-or-act-of-accused-should-be-made-in-fir-to-attract-offence-under-s-1191a-of-kerala-police-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":348028,"position":5},"title":"Ker HC | Specific allegation of gesture or act\u00a0 of accused should be made in FIR to attract offence under S. 119(1)(a) of Kerala Police Act","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 28, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: R. Narayana Pisharadi, J. quashed the proceedings under Kerala Police Act, 2011 against the petitioner by invoking the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The facts of the case were that the Sub Inspector found petitioner making obscene gestures having sexual flavors,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/348028","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67512"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=348028"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/348028\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/316393"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=348028"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=348028"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=348028"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}