Dismissed

Bharatiya Jain Sanghatana v. the Information Commissioner and Anr.

Bombay HC7 Oct 2022WP/1166/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of Writ Petition No.1166 of 2015 as infructuous, holding that the pending RTI appeals had been withdrawn by the respondent pursuant to a prior order dated 21st December 2015, granting liberty to file a fresh petition if withdrawal failed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of as infructuous; liberty granted to file fresh petition if Respondent No.2 fails to comply with the order dated 21st December 2015.

Bharatiya Jain Sanghatana Vs the Information… — RTI and Transparency | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

8-wp-1166-2015.doc

¶2

Pallavi

¶3

PALLAVI MAHENDRA WARGAONKAR

¶4

Digitally signed by PALLAVI MAHENDRA WARGAONKAR Date: 2022.10.10 17:15:04 +0530

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.1166 OF 2015

¶7

Bharatiya Jain Sanghatana...Petitioner
 Versus
The Information Commissioner and Anr...Respondents

¶8

Mr. V.R. Kasle, for the Petitioner.
Mr. P.P. Pujari, for Respondents.

¶9

CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATE : 7th OCTOBER, 2022

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1.Learned counsel for Petitioner, at the outset, points out the
order dated 21st December 2015 passed by this Court in Writ Petition
No.11296 of 2012 with Writ Petition No.391 of 2013. He states that the
Respondent No.2 has agreed to withdraw RTI Appeal/Application No.3215
of 2011 as well as RTI Application/ Appeal No.800 of 2012. He states that
the orders passed in said Appeal/Applications are impugned in the present
Petition. He submits that in view of the order dated 21st December 2015
the Petition be disposed of and in case the Respondent No.2 fails to
withdraw the said RTI Applications/Appeals, then liberty be granted to file
a fresh petition. The relevant portion of the order dated 21st December
2015 passed by this Court is reproduced hereinbelow:

¶12

“Further, Dr. Kankariya agrees and undertakes to withdraw and/
or compromise the under mentioned proceedings in terms of
the agreement reached by and between the contesting parties
which is recorded in this order. The proceedings are as follows :

¶13

8-wp-1166-2015.doc

¶14

I) Contempt Application No. 9 of 2012, pending before University Tribunal, Pune;

¶15

II) RTI Application No.3215 of 2011 filed before RTI Commissioner, Pune;

¶16

III) RTI Application No. 800 of 2012 filed before RTI Commissioner, Pune;

¶17

IV) Criminal Application No. 1174 of 2012 pending before Judicial Magistrate, Pimpri, Pune (present compromise to be filed as compromise pursis/consent term before the learned J.M.F.C., Pimpri, for appropriate orders of dismissal/ disposal).

¶18

5] The impugned orders stand modified in accordance with the terms as aforesaid to be construed along with the letter dated 7 August 2015.”

¶19

2.In view of the order dated 21st December 2015 passed by this
Court in Writ Petition No.11296 of 2012 with Writ Petition No.391 of
2013, the present petition is disposed of as the petition has become
infructuous, in view of withdrawal of Appeal/Application No.3215 of 2011
and Appeal/Application No.800 of 2012. However, if the Respondent No.2
fails to comply with the aforesaid order dated 21st December 2015 passed
by this Court then the Petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh petition in
addition to other remedy, if any.

¶20

3. Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms with no order as to

¶21

cost.

¶22

 (MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.)

¶23

2/2

Bharatiya Jain Sanghatana v. the Information Commissioner and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharatiya Jain Sanghatana v. the Information Commissioner and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Feroz M. Khan vs the Addl. Collector (Enc/Rem) and Appellant Authority Mumbai City and 7 Ors.

Symbiosis Society Vs Kishore Rajaram Vitkar and Ors.

Shri. Subhash Shripati Pagare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Vilas Ramu Mane and Ors. vs Ramu Ranu Mane(Deceased) Bhau Ganu Mane(Decd.Thr.Lrs) Sou. Sundrabai Birappa Kale and Ors.

Suzlon Energy Limited Ahmedabad Thr. Authorized Signatory Shri. Dhanaji Bhagwan Patil vs the State of Maharastra Thr. Dirstrict Government Pleader Sangli.

Maruti Tukaram Yadav Vs Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. and Ors.