S.P.Rajendhran Vs the State Information Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

S.P.Rajendhran Vs the State Information Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction (mandamus) to the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's second appeal S.A.No.10301/SCIC/24 in the manner known to law and in accordance with seniority, on the first hearing date, after hearing the petitioner and the Public Information Officer, without unnecessary adjournments; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the 1st respondent (State Information Commissioner, Tamil Nadu State Information Commission) should dispose of the petitioner's second appeal dated 07.08.2024 (registered as S.A.No.10301/SCIC/24) under the Right to Information Act, and consequentially provide certified copies of the information sought.

Court's answer

It may not be appropriate for this Court to examine the nature of information sought or the grounds raised in the appeal before the 1st respondent; the Court confined itself to the procedural question of disposal of the appeal.

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioner's appeal has been taken on file as S.A.No.10301/SCIC/24, an obligation is placed on the 1st respondent to dispose of the said second appeal in the manner known to law and in accordance with seniority, with the petitioner ready to advance arguments on the first hearing date.

Key takeaways

The disposal is to occur on the same (first hearing) date and after hearing the Public Information Officer also.ratio¶29
Unnecessary adjournments need not be granted while disposing of the second appeal.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India - disposal of RTI second appeal - petitioner sought direction to the State Information Commissioner, Tamil Nadu State Information Commission to dispose of his second appeal dated 07.08.2024, taken on file as S.A.No.10301/SCIC/24 - Court declined to examine the nature of information sought or the grounds raised in the appeal - obligation placed on the 1st respondent to dispose of the second appeal in the manner known to law and in accordance with seniority, on the first hearing date, after hearing the petitioner and the Public Information Officer, and without unnecessary adjournments - writ petition disposed of, no costs (Madras HC, C.V.Karthikeyan J., 08.01.2025).

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08.01.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

W.P.No.477 of 2025

S.P.Rajendhran

.. Petitioner

Vs.

1.The State Information Commissioner, Tamil Nadu State Information Commission, No.19, Government Farm Village Fenepet, Nandhanam,

Chennai – 600 035.

2.The First Appellate Public Information Officer Inspector General of Police Establishment, DGP Office,

Post Box No.601,

Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore,

Chennai – 600 104.

3.Public Information Officer, Assist IGP (L & O) DGP Office, Mylapore, Chennai 600 104.

.. Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to dispose the 2nd

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

2

Appeal filed by the Petitioner dated 07.08.2024 and consequently direct the Respondents to provide the certified copies of the information as sought for.

For Petitioner .. Mr.T.N.Rajagopalan For Respondents .. Mr.C.Vigneswaran Standing Counsel for R1

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed in the nature of a mandamus seeking a direction to the 1^st respondent, State Information Commissioner, Tamil Nadu State Information Commission to dispose of the second appeal filed by the petitioner under the provisions of the Right to Information Act on 07.08.2024.

2.It may not be appropriate on the part of this Court to examine the nature of information sought or the grounds raised in the appeal before the 1^st respondent.

3.However, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1^st respondent states that the appeal filed by the petitioner had been taken on file as S.A.No.10301/SCIC/24. An obligation is therefore placed on the 1^st respondent to dispose of the said second appeal in the manner known to law and in accordance with seniority and also on the first hearing date the petitioner herein is ready to advance arguments,

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

3

then on the same date and after hearing the Public Information Officer also. But

unnecessary adjournments need not be granted.

4.This writ petition stands disposed of. No Costs.

08.01.2025

Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order Neutral Citation:Yes/No ssr

To

1.The State Information Commissioner, Tamil Nadu State Information Commission, No.19, Government Farm Village Fenepet, Nandhanam,

Chennai – 600 035.

2.The First Appellate Public Information Officer Inspector General of Police Establishment, DGP Office, Post Box No.601, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore,

Chennai – 600 104.

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

4

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

ssr

3.Public Information Officer, Assist IGP (L & O) DGP Office, Mylapore, Chennai 600 104.

W.P.No.477 of 2025

08.01.2025

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