Disposed¶48

Lokesh v. the State Rep by

Madras HC11 Nov 2025WP/41439/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

RTI Act Section 8 exceptions; Right to Information second appeal; State Information Commission Tamil Nadu; expeditious disposal of second appeal; Infrastructure Dean Fund (IDF); Government Medical College Hospital Tiruvannamalai; Public Information Officer; First Appellate Authority; certified information in sealed cover; information furnished to applicant; writ petition closed no costs; Madras High Court; Justice V. Lakshminarayanan; WP No. 41439 of 2025; S.A. No. 10788 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

The certified information sought was produced in a sealed cover, opened in the presence of the parties and handed over to the petitioner's counsel; the first respondent was directed to close S.A. No. 10788 of 2025 recording the third respondent's compliance with the Court's directions dated 04.11.2025; the writ petition was closed with no costs.

Lokesh Vs the State Rep by — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶48

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition seeking expeditious disposal of the petitioner's second appeal (S.A. No. 10788 of 2025) pending before the first respondent, and furnishing of the information sought therein, should be granted. +1 more

¶30

Court's answer

Since the informations sought by the petitioner have been provided, nothing further remains to be adjudicated either by this Court or by the first respondent; the first respondent shall close S.A. No. 10788 of 2025 recording the compliance by the third respondent with the directions given by the Court on 04.11.2025, and the writ petition is closed with no costs.

¶45

Ratio / Principle

None of the informations sought by the petitioner are personal in nature or covered by the exceptions under Section 8 of the Right to Information Act; they relate to the Infrastructure Dean Fund (IDF) maintained by the Dean of Government Medical College and Hospital, Tiruvannamalai, and constitute public information which the Dean ought to have issued without troubling the petitioner to approach the appellate authorities.

¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (V. Lakshminarayanan, J.), WP No. 41439 of 2025, decided 11-11-2025: An RTI applicant who had sought information relating to the Infrastructure Dean Fund (IDF) maintained by the Dean of Government Medical College Hospital, Tiruvannamalai, and whose second appeal (S.A. No. 10788 of 2025) was pending before the Tamil Nadu State Information Commission, filed this writ petition seeking expeditious disposal of the appeal. The Court found that none of the informations sought were personal in nature or covered by the exceptions under Section 8 of the Right to Information Act and constituted public information which the Dean ought to have furnished. On the Court's direction, the information was duly certified, produced in a sealed cover, opened in the presence of the parties and handed over to the petitioner's counsel. Holding that nothing further remained to be adjudicated, the Court directed the State Information Commission to close the second appeal recording the Public Information Officer's compliance, and closed the writ petition with no costs.

¶1

WP No. 41439 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 11-11-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

WP No. 41439 of 2025

¶7

Lokesh S/o.Indrakumar, No.1, 5th New Street, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District 606 601.

¶8

Petitioner(s)

¶9

¶10

The State Rep By The Commissioner, The State Information Commission, Block No-19, Government Farm Village, Nandanam, Chennai-35

¶11

2.First Appellate Authority, Government Hospital And Medical Collage, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶12

3.The Public Information Officer, Government Medical College Hospital, Tiruvannamalai Dstrict.

¶13

1/6

¶14

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

WP No. 41439 of 2025

Respondent(s)

PRAYER

directing the 1st respondent to dispose the second appeal preferred by the petitioner on 06.07.2025 and furnish the information which has been sought thereon.

¶19

For Petitioner(s): M/s.R.Thirumoorthy S.Arunkumar S.Sivasekar M.Kishore J.Ganesh R.Joshua K.Sundarraj

¶20

For Respondent(s): Mr.C.Vigneswaran Takes Notice For R1 Mr.Tippu Sultan Takes Notice For RR2 And 3.

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The petitioner has sought for certain informations from the 3rd respondent.

¶23

It was not provided. Hence, he filed an appeal to the 2nd respondent. Even then,

¶24

he was not successful. Therefore, he troubled the 1st respondent by way of a

¶25

second appeal.

¶26

The 1st respondent numbered the second appeal in S.A. No. 10788 of

¶27

2/6

¶28

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

¶29

WP No. 41439 of 2025

¶30

The petitioner came forward with this writ petition seeking expeditious disposal of that appeal.

¶31

When I took up the matter on 04.11.2025, I noticed that none of the

¶32

informations that the petitioner sought are personal in nature or covered by any

¶33

of the exceptions under Section 8 of the Right to Information Act. These the informations sought for by the petitioner related to the Infrastructure Dean Fund(IDF) that are maintained by the Dean of Government Medical College

¶34

and Hospital at Tiruvannamalai.

¶35

It is a public information, which the Dean ought to have issued without

¶36

troubling the petitioner to approach the appellate authorities. Hence, I requested Mr.Tippu Sultan to get the information duly certified by the 3rd respondent and produce the same before this Court.

¶37

Accordingly, Mr.Tippu Sultan has produced the records in a sealed

¶38

cover before this court. They were opened in the presence all the parties to the

¶39

proceedings before this Court and handed over to Mr.J.Ganesan, representing

¶40

3/6

¶41

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

¶42

WP No. 41439 of 2025

¶43

Mr.R.Thirumoorthy.

¶44

6.Since the informations that the petitioner sought for have been

¶45

provided, nothing further remains to be adjudicated either by this Court or by the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent shall close S.A. No. 10788 of 2025

¶46

recording the compliance by the 3rd respondent of the directions given by this

¶47

Court on 04.11.2025.

¶48