Disposed¶56

Sp. Aadithya Cholan v. the Chief Commissioner

Madras HC18 Jul 2025WP/26336/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras HC, WP 26336/2025, decided 18.07.2025 (N. Mala, J.): Mandamus under Art. 226 to Chief Commissioner, TN State Information Commission, to decide petitioner's second appeal SA/6511/SCIC/2025 (Regn. OL2025007025) within 12 weeks; arises from DVAC PIO's rejection (17.12.2024, S.7(9) RTI Act) of RTI request on corruption/non-corruption cases against sitting and former MPs/MLAs; Art.19(1)(a) plea noted but not decided; disposed of at admission stage by consent, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent/State Chief Information Commissioner, Tamil Nadu, to consider the petitioner's Second Appeal dated 19.04.2025 on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order; no costs. ¶56

Sp. Aadithya Cholan Vs the Chief Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶56

Issue for consideration

Whether this Court should direct the 1st respondent/State Chief Information Commissioner, Tamil Nadu, to consider and dispose of the petitioner's Second Appeal dated 19/04/2025 bearing Registration No.OL2025007025, Second Appeal No.SA/6511/SCIC/2025, within a stipulated time (limited relief ultimately pressed by learned counsel for the petitioner). +1 more

¶18

Court's answer

In view of the facts and considering the limited relief sought, and without going into the merits of the case, this Court directed the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's Second Appeal dated 19.04.2025 on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order; the writ petition stands disposed of with no costs.

¶54

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MADRAS HC (N. Mala, J.) — W.P.No.26336 of 2025, decided 18.07.2025. Petitioner, an Advocate serving as Joint Coordinator of the Advocate Wing (Chennai Zone) of Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 directing the Chief Commissioner, Tamil Nadu State Information Commission, to consider and dispose of his Second Appeal dated 19/04/2025 (Regn. No.OL2025007025; SA/6511/SCIC/2025) within a stipulated time. The second appeal arose after his RTI application dated 19.11.2024 to the DVAC Public Information Officer — seeking details of corruption and non-corruption cases registered against sitting and former MPs/MLAs in Tamil Nadu — was rejected on 17.12.2024 invoking Section 7(9) of the RTI Act, and his First Appeal of 05.01.2025 went unactioned; the second appeal remained pending beyond the statutory timeline, which the petitioner contended defeated the purpose of the Right to Information Act, 2005 and violated Article 19(1)(a). By consent, the petition was taken up for final disposal at admission stage. Without going into the merits, the Court directed the 1st respondent to consider the second appeal on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders within twelve (12) weeks of receipt of a copy of the order. Writ petition disposed of; no costs.

¶1

W.P.No.26336 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 18.07.2025

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA

¶6

Writ Petition No.26336 of 2025

SP.Aadithya Cholan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Chief Commissioner, State Information Commission, Block No.19, Government Farm Village, Nandanam, Chennai - 600 035.

¶11

2.The First Appellate Authority and Deputy Director Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) No.293, MKN Road, Alandur, Chennai - 600 016.

¶12

3.The Public Information Officer, Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) No.293, M.K.N.Road, Alandur, Chennai - 600 016.

¶13

… Respondents

¶14

Page No.1 of 7

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.No.26336 of 2025

¶17

PRAYER:

¶18

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing 1st respondent /State Chief Information Commissioner, Tamil Nadu, to consider and dispose of the petitioner's Second Appeal dated 19/04/2025 bearing Registration No.OL2025007025, Second Appeal No.SA/6511/SCIC/2025 within a stipulated time.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.Arun Kasi

¶20

For Respondents : Mr.C.Vigneshwaran for R1 Standing Counsel Mr. Subbiah for R2 & R3 Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

Seeking directions to the 1st respondent /State Chief Information

¶23

Commissioner, Tamil Nadu, to consider and dispose of the petitioner's

¶24

Second Appeal dated 19/04/2025, bearing Registration SA /6511/SCIC/2025,

¶25

the present writ petition is filed.

¶26

Page No.2 of 7

¶27

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

¶28

W.P.No.26336 of 2025

¶29

2.Mr.C.Vigneshwaran, learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the 1st

¶30

respondent and Mr. Subbiah, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) takes notice for the respondents 2 & 3.

¶31

By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final

¶32

disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶33

The Petitioner, an Advocate by profession is currently serving as the

¶34

Joint Coordinator, of the Advocate Wing (Chennai Zone) of Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), a registered political party. Whileso, the petitioner submitted a RTI application on 19.11.2024, to the 3rd respondent/ the Public Information Officer, of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) seeking detailed information on corruption and non-corruption cases registered against both sitting and former MPs and MLAs in Tamil Nadu,

¶35

including case numbers, status (FIR, investigation, trial, closure), and names Page No.3 of 7

¶36

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

¶37

W.P.No.26336 of 2025 of the individuals involved. Invoking Section 7(9) of the RTI Act, the said

¶38

application was rejected on 17.12.2024.

¶39

Aggrieved by the said rejection, the Petitioner filed a First Appeal on

¶40

05.01.2025. Since no action was taken, the petitioner filed Second Appeal

¶41

before the State Information Commission. The petitioner states that despite

¶42

the statutory time line, the appeal was kept pending without any orders being

¶43

passed. According to the petitioner, this prolonged inaction defeated the very

¶44

purpose of the Right to Information Act, 2005, and violated the petitioner's fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, hence he was

¶45

constrained to file the above writ petition for the aforesaid relief.

¶46

Though many issues were raised in the writ petition, learned counsel

¶47

for the petitioner submitted that it would suffice if, this Court directs the 1st

¶48

respondent, to dispose the petitioner's Second Appeal dated 19.04.2025,

¶49

within a stipulated time as fixed by this Court. Page No.4 of 7

¶50

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

¶51

W.P.No.26336 of 2025

¶52

In view of the above facts and considering the limited relief sought

¶53

for by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court without going into the

¶54

merits of the case, directs the 1st respondent, to consider the petitioner's Second Appeal dated 19.04.2025, on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders, within a period of twelve(12) weeks from the date of receipt of a

¶55

copy of this order.

¶56