Disposed

V.Chandru, v. The Appellate Authority Cum

Madras HC11 Feb 2020WP/24454/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking mandamus directing the appellate authority to consider an RTI appeal. The Court held that if the appellate authority has not disposed of the appeal, the petitioner must work out the remedy by filing a further second appeal. The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to file the appeal.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file the second appeal before the appellate authority. No costs.

V.Chandru, Vs The Appellate Authority Cum — RTI and Transparency | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 11.02.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU

W.P.No.24454 of 2017

V.Chandru

... Petitioner

The Appellate Authority cum
The Block Development Officer,
Annaikattu,
Vellore District.
2. The Public Information Officer cum
Deputy Block Development Officer,
Annaikattu. ... Respondents

¶10

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.04.2017.

¶11

For Petitioner : Ms.B.Kavya for Mr.R.Jayaprakash For Respondents: Mr.D.Suriyanarayanan, Additional Government Pleader

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

This Writ Petition is filed seeking for a Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated.20.04.2017 and pass orders on the same.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶15

It is seen that the petitioner sought certain information from the 2nd respondent under the Rights to Information Act,2005. It is the case of the petitioner that the 2nd respondent did not furnish such information and therefore, he approached the 1st respondent/ appellate authority and filed an appeal. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the 1st respondent/ appellate authority has not disposed of the appeal. If the 1st respondent is not disposing of the appeal, it is for the petitioner to work out https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ his remedy by filing further second appeal before the

¶16

concerned appellate authority as provided under the said Act. Without doing to, seeking for a Mandamus is not the proper course of action. Therefore, by granting liberty to the petitioner to file such appeal, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶17

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CS-V)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
vsi
To
1. The Appellate Authority cum
The Block Development Officer,
Annaikattu,
Vellore District.
2. The Public Information Officer cum
Deputy Block Development Officer,
Annaikattu.
+1cc to Mr.R.Jayaprakash, Advocate, S.R.No. 11056
W.P.No.24454 of 2017
BS(CO)
GN(04/03/2020)

¶18

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

V.Chandru, v. The Appellate Authority Cum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Chandru, v. The Appellate Authority Cum

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

A.Shoukathali Vs The Management

M/s.Marimuthu Enterprises Vs The Regional Provident Fund

Thiru. P.Sundararajan Vs Joint Director

B.Selvam Vs The Managing Director

Ttk Health Care Ltd., Vs United Labour Federation

Narayan Jain Vs The Commissioner of Customs