Disposed

S.Mohan v. The Public Information Officer and Superintending Engineer/Solar

Madras HC7 Dec 2020WP/14203/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the Public Information Officer and Engineers of TANGEDCO to furnish information under the RTI Act, 2005 for queries raised on 02.02.2020, as the previous reply allegedly failed to disclose required data.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of after recording the latest reply which answered all queries; no further direction issued.

S.Mohan Vs The Public Information Officer and… — RTI and Transparency | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 07.12.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

¶5

W.P.No.14203 of 2020

¶6

S.Mohan .. Petitioner

¶7

¶8

1.The Public Information Officer and .. Respondents Superintending Engineer / Solar TANGEDCO, 2^nd Floor, Eastern Wing 144, Anna Salai, NPKRR Maligai Chennai 600 002.

¶9

2.The Chief Engineer / Civil / Distribution NCES, TANGEDCO, 2^nd Floor Eastern Wing, NPKRR Maligai

¶10

144, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

¶11

Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to furnish all the informations / queries sought for under Right to Information Act, 2005 vide RTI Application dated 02.02.2020 within the time schedule fixed by this Court.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar

¶13

For Respondents : Mr.M.Vijay Meganath, Junior Standing Counsel

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The prayer sought for herein is to direct the respondents to furnish all the informations / queries sought for under Right to Information Act, 2005 vide RTI Application dated 02.02.2020 within the time schedule fixed by this Court.

¶16

The petitioner, on 02.02.2020, has made a RTI application to the first respondent / Public Information Officer of the TANGEDCO raising certain queries. Thereafter it seems that, on 29.02.2020 a reply has been given by the respondents and thereafter communication has been there between the petitioner and the respondents on various dates between March 2020 and July 2020.

¶17

However according to the petitioner, the information https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ sought for by way of raising the queries by the application

¶18

made by the petitioner dated 02.02.2020 has not been fully furnished and in fact the reply said have been given on 29.02.2020, though had not reached the petitioner initially and subsequently reached, however it did not disclose some of the information required by the petitioner by his application dated 02.02.2020. Therefore, he seeks a direction to the respondents / Public Information Officer, TANGEDCO to furnish all the information sought for by the petitioner through his application dated 02.02.2020.

¶19

Heard Mr.Udaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, who has reiterated the above. However, Mr.Vijay Mehanath, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent TANGEDCO, on instructions, would submit that, initially a reply was given on 29.02.2020 in reply to the RTI application dated 02.02.2020. However, the said communication could not be served on the petitioner, as the cover sent to that effect has been returned and subsequently only it was served.

¶20

A perusal of the said communication dated 29.02.2020 reveals that, only few queries raised by the petitioner had been answered and the remaining queries had not been answered, as those queries are related to another department of TANGEDCO and in order to give full reply, it seems that, the request made by the petitioner has been forwarded to the concerned wing of the respondent TANGEDCO.

¶21

Ultimately, now the respondent TANGEDCO has come out with a detailed communication issued by the Public Information Officer and Superintending Engineer (Solar), TANGEDCO, Chennai vide reply letter dated 23.11.2020 addressed to the petitioner and a copy of the same has also been filed before this Court by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent TANGEDCO.

¶22

On a perusal of the latest reply dated 23.11.2020 given by the respondents, it discloses that, all the six queries raised by the petitioner through his application under RTI Act dated 02.02.2020 has been answered by the respondent TANGEDCO and therefore, as far as the petitioner is concerned, there could be no further grievance to be adjudicated in this writ petition.

¶23

In view of the above, by recording the said communication of the respondents dated 23.11.2020, being the reply under the RTI Act, to the queries raised by the petitioner in his application dated 02.02.2020, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶24

-sd/Assistant Registrar (cs) //True Copy//

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ KST

¶26

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶27

¶28

1.The Public Information Officer and Superintending Engineer / Solar TANGEDCO, 2^nd Floor, Eastern Wing

¶29

144, Anna Salai, NPKRR Maligai Chennai 600 002.

¶30

2.The Chief Engineer / Civil / Distribution NCES, TANGEDCO, 2^nd Floor Eastern Wing, NPKRR Maligai 144, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

¶31

+1 C.C.to MR.S.UDAYAKUMAR,ADVOCATE SR.NO.39430

¶32

W.P.No.14203 of 2020
RSV (CO)
UMY (19/12/2020)

¶33

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Mohan v. The Public Information Officer and Superintending Engineer/Solar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Mohan v. The Public Information Officer and Superintending Engineer/Solar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Ganesan Vs The Management of Hyundai Motor India Limited

G.Sridhar Babu Vs M/s.State Express Transport Corporation

K.Mani Vs The Secretary to Government

M/s.United Institute of Technology Vs Deputy Director

Salem Textile Limited Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Gafoor Vs The Under Secretary