Disposed

Chandra Bhan Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2018WRIC/23299/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of the writ petition filed for a mandamus to decide the pending first appeal and a certiorari to quash a specific letter. The Court observed that the petitioner could file a fresh appeal with the demanded documents within 15 days and directed that such a new appeal would be decided within the statutory period. The petition was finally disposed of without granting the specific re

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to file a fresh appeal under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act, 2005 with documents within 15 days; petition disposed of.

Chandra Bhan Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — RTI and Transparency | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 32

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23299 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Chandra Bhan Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhanu Prakash Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Kunal Ravi Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

This writ petition has been filed interalia for the following reliefs:-

¶6

(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to decide and consider the petitioner's Appeals and further direct the respondents to furnish the information sought by the petitioner.

¶7

(ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the letter with regard to petitioner's application dated 11.10.2017 (Annexure No. 5 to the writ petition).

¶8

Heard Sri Bhanu Prakash Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Kunal Ravi Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State and perused the record.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that an appeal under Section 19(3) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 has been filed by the petitioner but the same has not yet been decided by the respondent authority within the stipulated period.

¶10

Sri Kunal Ravi Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has referred to the Annexure 6 to the writ petition whereby a notice dated 29.11.2017 has been issued by the Registrar, Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission, Lucknow to the petitioner asking him to furnish the copy of the original application submitted by him under Section 6(1) of the Act before respondent no. 4 as well as the copy of the first appeal under Section 19(3) of the Act.

¶11

While referring to the paragraph 21 of the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner has further stated that the petitioner has already submitted the aforesaid documents i.e. application under Section 6(1) of the Act and the copy of the first appeal under Section 19(3) of the Act before the respondent no. 2 but the respondent no. 2 without considering the aspect of the matter has returned the appeal.

¶12

Be that as it may, it is open for the petitioner to file a fresh appeal under Section 19(3) of the Right to Information act, 2005 before the concerned authority annexing the documents as earlier demanded by the Registrar, Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission, Lucknow vide its notice dated 29.11.2017. In case, such appeal is filed by the petitioner before the concerned authority within a period of 15 days from today, the same shall be decided within the stipulated period as provided under the Right to Information Act, 2005.

¶13

With this observation, the present writ petition stands finally disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 13.7.2018 Arun

Chandra Bhan Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Bhan Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Waqf Kar-E-Khair Jafri Begum Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Bijendra Singh and Another Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Committee of Management Smt. Surya Kumari Balika Uchchtar Madhyamik Vidyalay and Another Vs National Highway Authority of India and Another

Dillu Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Ankit Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Avinash Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others