SC: Suit Alleging Coercion or Undue Influence Cannot be Rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC || Cal HC: Once ED Attachment is Confirmed, Challenge Becomes Academic; PMLA Remedy Must be Pursued || MP HC: Pen-Drive Evidence Cannot be Introduced At a Late Trial Stage Without Proof or Relevance || Calcutta HC: Employee Can't be Stopped From Joining Rival Post-Resignation; Trade Secrets Protected || Calcutta HC: Banks Must Provide Forensic Audit Report Before Calling an Account Fraudulent || Del HC: Woman Cannot Demand Re-Entry to Abandoned Matrimonial Home if Alternate Accommodation Exists || Calcutta HC: Land Acquisition For Industrial Park is Public Purpose; Leasing to Industry is Valid || Patna HC: PwD Recruitment Must Comply With RPwD Act; Executive Resolutions Cannot Override the Law || Madras HC: Individuals Facing Criminal Trial Must Get Court Permission Even to Renew Passports || Calcutta HC: Demolition Orders Cannot be Challenged under Article 226 if a Statutory Appeal Exists

Avinash Kumar v. Aruna Asaf Ali Government Hospital, GNCTD - (Central Information Commission) (06 Aug 2015)

Concealing name itself protection for whistle-blower

MANU/CI/0198/2015

Right to Information

In a case involving non-response to an application for information by a whistle-blower, the Central Information Commission passed orders for ceasing of harassment of the whistle-blower. In the case, the Appellant's name had been leaked to the accused, which had led to his harassment. The Commission noted that no action had been taken on the revelations by the Appellant, instead he had been relieved of his duties and transferred out of his place of work.

Relevant : Indirect Tax Practitioners Association vs. R.K. Jain MANU/SC/0593/2010

Tags : WHISTLE BLOW RIGHT TO INFORMATION HARASS

Share :