Quashed

M.Padmini v. Mr.Rajagopal Ias.

Madras HC12 Dec 2022CONT P/736/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Disposal of a contempt petition filed by M.Padmini against the State Information Commissioner and others for disobeying an earlier order. The Court set aside a petition-compliant but jurisdiction-avoiding order by the Commission and remitted the matter for appropriate action.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 29.09.2022 of the Commission set aside; matter remitted to pass appropriate orders within two months.

M.Padmini Vs Mr.Rajagopal Ias. — RTI and Transparency | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Contempt Petition No.736 of 2022

¶2

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 12.12.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶6

Contempt Petition No.736 of 2022

M.Padmini

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.Mr.Rajagopal I.A.S., The State Information Commissioner, State Information Commission, No.2, Thiyagaraya Salai, Near Aalai Amman Kovil, Teynampet, Chennai – 600018.

¶11

2.Mr.P.Ponniah I.A.S., Commissioner of Municipal Administration, Municipal Administration, 6^th Floor, Ezhilagam Annex Building, Chepauk, Chennai – 600005.

¶12

3.Amsaveni, Public Information Commission, Mettupalayam Municipality, Mettupalayam, Coimbatore District.

¶13

..Respondents

¶14

1/6

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

Contempt Petition No.736 of 2022

¶17

Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, seeking to punish the respondents herein for their willful disobediene and defiance of the Order of this Hon'ble Court dated 17.02.2021 in Writ Petition W.P.No.19872 of 2020.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Varsha For Respondents : Mr.C.Vigneswaran Standing Counsel for R1 Mr.U.Baranidharan Additional Government Pleader for R2 & R3

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The petitioner complains of contempt of the order dated 17.02.2021 made in W.P.No.19872 of 2020. The said Writ Petition was filed challenging the order of the 1^st respondent dated 12.09.2019, in and by which, the Public Information Officer namely, the Commissioner, Mettupalayam Municipality was directed to furnish information.

¶21

2.This Court held that under Section 20 of the Act, Information

¶22

Commission has a power to impose penalty for refusal of furnishing information and furnishing the incorrect or incomplete information therefore,

¶23

2/6

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

Contempt Petition No.736 of 2022

¶26

the disposal of the Second Appeal by the Commission, directing the Officer to furnish the Information itself was held to be incorrecct. While setting aside the order, this Court directed the Commission to pass orders afresh, in the light of the power conferred on it under the Act.

¶27

3.The Commission however, has passed a totally innocuous order

¶28

on 29.09.2022 wherein, the Commission has stated as follows:-

¶29

6/,d;iwa tprhuiz Kotpy; kDjhuh; nfhhpa[s;s epthuzj;jpw;F chpa jPh;t[fhz nkl;Lg;ghisak; efuhl;rp nkyhsh; / bghJj;jfty; mYtyUf;F mwpt[Wj;jg;gLfpwJ/ This is worse than the earlier order that was set aside by this Court.

¶30

4.No doubt, it is only a contempt that is before me. However, in

¶31

view of the fact that the Commission had failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it, I invoke the plenary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and set aside the order dated 29.09.2022. The matter is remitted

¶32

back to the Commission with a direction to pass appropriate orders giving full effect to the provisions of the Act.

¶33

3/6

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

Contempt Petition No.736 of 2022

¶36

5.Considering the compliance, this Contempt Petition is closed,

¶37

there will be a direction to dispose of the appeal within a peirod of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶38

12.12.2022

¶39

kkn

¶40

Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order

¶41

4/6

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶43

Contempt Petition No.736 of 2022

¶44

To:-

¶45

1.Mr.Rajagopal I.A.S., The State Information Commissioner, State Information Commission, No.2, Thiyagaraya Salai, Near Aalai Amman Kovil, Teynampet, Chennai – 600018.

¶46

2.Mr.P.Ponniah I.A.S., Commissioner of Municipal Administration, Municipal Administration,

¶47

6^th Floor, Ezhilagam Annex Building, Chepauk, Chennai – 600005.

¶48

3.Amsaveni, Public Information Commission, Mettupalayam Municipality, Mettupalayam, Coimbatore District.

¶49

5/6

¶50

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶51

Contempt Petition No.736 of 2022

¶52

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

¶53

KKN

¶54

Contempt Petition No.736 of 2022

¶55

12.12.2022

¶56

6/6

¶57

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

M.Padmini v. Mr.Rajagopal Ias.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Padmini v. Mr.Rajagopal Ias.

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

V.Lalitha Vs The state of TamilNadu

N.Radha Vs The Secretary

Ameen Ahsan Vs Directorate of Collegiate Education

Mohammed Nayimuddin Vs The Chairman and Managing Director

Jayalakshmi Vs Kaveri

Santhosh Kumar, Vs The Chairman