Petitioner sought review under CPC to grant time for appeals against rejection orders under RTI Act. Court noted statutory appeal remedies exist, granted extensions sequentially, and held review is not maintainable to bypass appeal timeline. Review dismissed with no costs.
Review application dismissed. No costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Review Application (W) No.54 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08.09.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
Review Application (W) No. 54 of 2023
J.Rubancharles
.. Petitioner
vs
.. Respondents
Petition filed under Section 114 r/w Order XL Rule 15 CPC to
review order dated 23.01.2023 made in W.P.No.1403 of 20 23.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Rubancharles Party-in-Person For Respondents : Mr.S.Ravikumar Special Government Pleader
ORDER
The petitioner appears as party-in-person.
of a certiorarified mandamus seeking records of the second https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/4
Review Application (W) No.54 of 2023
respondent, the Public Information Officer, Headquarters, Deputy Thasildar, Poonamallee Tahsildar Office, Poonamallee, Chennai and to quash the impugned order issued in September, 2022 and signed on 09.09.2022 under the Right to Information Act and direct the second respondent to supply information as sought by the petitioner through letter dated 12.08.2022 under Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act. This Court, had, passed the following order in the said writ petition on 23.01.2023:-
“2. An order had been passed refusing to provide that particular information. As against the said rejection there is an appellate remedy which is available.
3. If the petitioner has lost out on the issue of limitation, I would grant time to file necessary appeal in accordance with the provisions of the said Act. Such appeal should be filed on or before 10.02.2023. If it is filed on or before 10.02.2023, this appeal may be taken on record if it is otherwise in order. If it is not filed within 10.02.2023, then the petitioner will have to suffer the necessary consequences.
4. Stating as above, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs.”
stated. Again his request had been rejected by order in March, 2023 but signed on 03.03.2023. As against that particular order, again there is an appeal provision under the Right to Information Act.
2/4
Review Application (W) No.54 of 2023
he has not filed an appeal as on date, time is extended to file such appeal on or before 15.10.2023. If the appeal is filed on or before that particular date, the issue of limitation need not be put against the petitioner. If any order is passed on that particular appeal, which can be called as second appeal under the Right to Information Act, the petitioner can always take further re-course as stipulated under the Right to Information Act.
dismissed. No costs.
08.09.2023
Index:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No ssm
To
3/4
Review Application (W) No.54 of 2023
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.
ssm
Review Application (W) No. 54 of 2023
08.09.2023
4/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a review application is maintainable and what the appropriate remedy is against a rejection of appeal information under the RTI Act.
Whether the time limit to file appeals under the RTI Act can be extended.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
J.Rubancharles
The Tahsildar, Poonamallee Thasildar Office
The Public Information Officer
C.V.Karthikeyan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
