Junaid Javid v. Union of India and Anr. (Central Information Commission)

ORDER

01.07.2026 CM (1955/2026):

¶01This is an application seeking permission to place on record certain suggestions for addressing the pendency of appeals arising from the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir before the Central Information Commission.

¶02For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. The suggestions forming part of the application are taken on record.

¶03CM stands disposed of. WP(C)PIL 4/2025

¶01This is a petition filed in public interest by one Junaid Javid, a resident of Uri, Baramulla. A direction in the nature of a

2 | P a g e

writ of mandamus is sought to the Central Information Commission (CIC) to decide all pending appeals, particularly those filed by the residents of Jammu and Kashmir, within 45 days. The petitioner also prays for putting in place a mechanism whereby the second appeals filed before the CIC are disposed of in a time-bound manner. Additionally, the petitioner has also placed on record certain suggestions for improving the working of the CIC.

¶02The CIC has filed its response and has indicated its difficulty in adhering to a particular timeline for deciding the appeals, keeping in view the infrastructure available and the number of second appeals and complaints received by the CIC.

¶03Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, we are of the considered opinion that, in view of the reply submitted by the CIC, nothing more can be said by this Court. The Right to Information Act, 2005 does not lay down any timeline for deciding the second appeals and complaints under the Act and, therefore, we cannot, by issuing a mandamus, fix a timeline of 45 days for disposal of the second appeals and complaints by the CIC, as prayed for by the petitioner. However, it cannot be said that the CIC can sit over the appeals for an unduly long period and keep them undecided for years together. The CIC needs to improve its working and put a mechanism in place so as to overcome the pendency of appeals and to tackle the inflow of fresh appeals and complaints.

¶04This petition is accordingly disposed of by directing the CIC to look into the matter and take appropriate measures to improve its working, subject, of course, to the infrastructural constraints and the inflow of second appeals and complaints. The CIC may also do well to consider the suggestions made by the

3 | P a g e

petitioner and make use of them for improving its working, provided they found genuine and realistic.

¶05Disposed of.

(Mohd Yousuf Wani)

(Sanjeev Kumar) Judge

Chief Justice (Acting)

SRINAGAR:

01.07.2026 "Mubashir"

1 | P a g e Serial No. 26 REGULAR CAUSE LIST HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C)PIL 4/2025 JUNAID JAVID …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Naveed Bukhtiyar, Advocate Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. T.M. Shamsi, DSGI with Mr. Rehana Qayoom, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING) HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHD YOUSUF WANI, JUDGE