Kompu Dolo v. The Arunachal Pradesh Information Commission and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC6 Apr 2025WP(C)/154/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court Itanagar Bench; WP(C)/154/2025; Kompu Dolo v. Arunachal Pradesh Information Commission and Ors; RTI application versus election records; Representation of the People Act 1951; election petition records callable only by the election court; RTI dated 19.06.2024 rejected by reply dated 05.07.2024; Returning Officer 9th Chayang Tajo ST Assembly Constituency; Election Petition No.01/2024; withdrawal of writ petition with liberty; Justice Kalyan Rai Surana; order dated 07.04.2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition permitted to be withdrawn; liberty granted to the petitioner to take appropriate steps in Election Petition No.01/2024 to call for certain relevant records. ¶¶30

Kompu Dolo Vs The Arunachal Pradesh Information Commission and… — Election Law | Gauhati HC (2025)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC040005292025

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/154/2025

¶5

Kompu Dolo

¶6

Son of Late Tagung Rebe, resident of Village Rebe, PO and PS Chayang Tajo, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh. 790102

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The Arunachal Pradesh Information Commission and 4 Ors represented by the State Information Commissioner cum Registrar, APIC, ESS Sector, Old Planning Building, Itanagar, 791111 2:The Registrar / Deputy Registrar Age: 0 Occupation : Arunachal Pradesh Information Commission ESS Sector Old Planning Building Itanagar 791111 3:The Chief Electoral Officer cum First Appellate Authority Age: 0 Occupation : Nirvachan Bhavan Itanagar Arunachal Pradesh 791111 4:The Deputy Commissioner cum District Election Officer Age: 0 Occupation : Seppa East Kameng District Arunachal Pradesh 790102 5:The Public Information Officer Age: 0 Occupation :

¶9

Page No.# 2/4

¶10

The ADC cum Returning Officer 9th Chayang Tajo ST Assembly Constituency Chayang Tajo East Kameng District Arunachal Pradesh 79010

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : Takar Bagang, M G Singh

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), SC(APIC),Rintu Saikia

¶13

BEFORE

¶14

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Date : 07.04.2025

¶17

Heard Mr. T. Bagang, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. Saikia, learned counsel for the respondent nos.1 and 2; and Ms. T. Wangmo, learned standing counsel for the respondent nos.3, 4 and 5.

¶18

In brief, the case of the petitioner is that he is the petitioner in Election Petition No.01/2024, which is pending before this Court. It is submitted that in order to establish his case, the petitioner had made an RTI application on 06.06.2024 before the Returning Officer, 9^th Chayang Tajo, ST Assembly Constituency, the description of which is mentioned in paragraph-3 of this writ petition.

¶19

It is submitted that a subsequent RTI application was filed on 19.06.2024 before the Election Officer, East Kameng District, Sepa, requesting for providing him the documents, which is referred to in paragraph-4 of this writ petition. However, the second application, which was filed on 19.06.2024 was rejected by reply dated 05.07.2024.

¶20

Page No.# 3/4

¶21

Be that as it may, on perusal of the writ petition, the petitioner is not found to have annexed all the documents, because in respect of the RTI application dated 06.06.2024, reply received is not annexed. Although the petitioner has referred to Annexure-5 of the writ petition as an appeal, but in the said appeal, there is no reference to RTI application dated 06.06.2024.

¶22

In the absence of the documents in seriatim, the Court is disinclined to refer to the documents appended to this writ petition.

¶23

Be that as it may, in conduct of the Election Petition, it would only be the Court having jurisdiction to take up election matters, to pass appropriate orders to call for the relevant records. There are several documents under the election conducted under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which cannot be obtained in form of an RTI application, but can only be called for while trying an election petition.

¶24

Therefore, this Court taking up the election petition, is not powerless to call for any records which is deemed to be relevant on being satisfied with the requirement of the election petition.

¶25

In view of the said legal position, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to grant liberty to withdraw this writ petition and to take appropriate steps in connection with the Election Petition No.01/2024 to call for certain relevant records.

¶26