Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(information commission, §19(8), reasoned orders, namit sharma)
+metatag-description=(ICs are quasi-judicial; orders must be reasoned.)
+metatag-title=(Namit Sharma v. Union of India — 2013 — RTI case law)}}
+====== Namit Sharma v. Union of India ======
+**Namit Sharma v. Union of India** (Supreme Court of India, 2013-09-13) //(2013) 1 SCC 745// is a ruling on the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Section 19. ICs are quasi-judicial; orders must be reasoned. Information Commissions perform a quasi-judicial function.
+===== Holding =====
+ICs are quasi-judicial; orders must be reasoned.
+===== Ratio =====
+Information Commissions perform a quasi-judicial function. Orders under §19(8) must be reasoned and reflect application of mind on each issue raised. Composition of ICs subsequently modified in Union of India v. Namit Sharma (2014).
+===== Section(s) applied =====
+  * Section 19
+  * Sub-section 19(8)
+===== Practitioner takeaway =====
+IC adjudication standards; reasoned orders mandatory under §19(8).
+===== Citation =====
+  * **Citation:** (2013) 1 SCC 745
+  * **Court:** Supreme Court of India
+  * **Date:** 2013-09-13
+  * **Outcome:** disposed
+  * **Reporter / Cause-list:** (2013) 1 SCC 745
+===== Related =====
+  * [[:cases:search|RTI Case-Law Search — full corpus]]
+  * [[:pio-faa-knowledge-base|PIO/FAA Knowledge Base]]
+  * [[:pio-supreme-court-rulings|10 landmark Supreme Court RTI rulings]]
+  * [[:pio-high-court-rulings|High Court RTI rulings]]
+  * [[:landmark-cic-decisions|Landmark CIC decisions]]
+  * [[:act|RTI Act, 2005 — full text]]
+//Last reviewed: 23 April 2026.// {{tag>rti case-law cases sc 2013}}

Was this helpful? — views