Petitioner challenged a communication requesting details to be furnished to another party under the RTI Act. The court held the communication was not an adverse order.
Petitioner's writ petition is dismissed with 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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR
W.P.No.85 of 2016
ORDER:
Heard.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned communication of the 3rd respondent, dated 03-08-2015, whereunder the petitioner was only informed by way of communication to submit details, which are required to be furnished to the 5th respondent under the Right to Information Act.
I am unable to see how the said communication decides any right for or against the petitioner. The communication states that at the request of the 5th respondent seeking information under the Right to Information Act, which the Tahsildar and the Revenue Divisional Officer are obliged to furnish and for that purpose, the 3rd respondent requested the petitioner to furnish details.
In any case, the petitioner has given a detailed reply to the 4th respondent on 13-10-2015 referring to the civil proceedings already pending before a competent civil court apart from pendency of W.P.No.37171 of 2013. Respondents 3 and 4 shall therefore act on the said information and deal with the right of the 5th respondent under the Right to Information Act accordingly. So far as the petitioner is concerned, the impugned communication does not amount to any adverse order. Hence, no reasons exist to entertain the writ petition.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_______________________ VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR, J
Date: 05-01-2016 Prv
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR
W.P.No.85 of 2016
05-01-2016
Prv
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ against a communication requesting details for RTI purposes.
Whether the impugned communication amounts to an adverse order requiring judicial intervention.
Petitioner
3rd Respondent
5th Respondent
Vilas V. Afzulpurkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
