Dismissed

Patti Raja Gopal v. The Telangana State Information Commission

Telangana HC21 Mar 2022WP/12943/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Telangana High Court disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage. The petitioner sought information under the RTI Act which was denied by respondents. The court directed officials to inform the petitioner about necessary charges and provide information within two weeks of fee payment, without awarding costs.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to inform petitioner about charges within one week and furnish information within two weeks of payment. No costs.

Patti Raja Gopal Vs The Telangana State Information… — RTI and Transparency | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE^{STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY^{OF MARCH} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 1 2943 oF 2022

¶6

Between:

¶7

Patti Raja Gopal, S/o. Late Patti Siddanna, Age 62 years, Occ ; Ex-Secretary, AECHS Ltd. (TBC476), Aeronagar, Hyderabad. No. 25512RT, Patti Residence, Vijaya Nagar Colony, Hyderabad - 500057.

¶8

..,PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The Telang-ana state. rnformation commission, D.No s4, Samachara Hakku ?lrgyut,^{399, BehindttttozamZ_ahiIMarket,} Chindra Vihir, Oid K;ftrt Vfr"irf, Abids, Hyderabad Telangana 500 OO1 nep. Ov iis Commiisloner.

¶11

2 The District Co-Operative Officer and Registrar of Societies, Medchal -

¶12

Malkajgiri District. Tetangana 50140.l .

¶13

ThePre-sident, Aeronautics Employees Co_operatrve Housino Societv (AECHS). rBC 476, HnL, Baranisli, iya-erj'oaj_ +

¶14

The Secretary. Aeronautics Employees Co-operative Housing Society (AECHS), rlc 476. HAa Bar;;s;;lii.r"",ri', j _ az

¶15

,..RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit Jir.i^'in"r"itn, the High court mav be pleased to issue a writ order o,. Jiiu"lion-i.,orJ'p'rhi.rr.rrv one in the natuie of wRtr oF MANDAMUS oecraringl;J";.ii", "i,#""!^{and 4 Respondentin in nor} ntfl,il;l#ifr,t11,,.lrrls;!il[,fiifift Respondents 2 to 4 to. prorioe r,im I;;'i;Y;;:l-t consequentty #j$1i::sli;:direcr the ,Tj[""xl"*^{j:# jJit?i?ii:i!];l} jilliat,x,.":t:'.",:U,.::,,ff 'li"jf :: ro award costs, and piss.

¶17

¶18

l.A.NO:1 OF 2022

¶19

Petition Under section^{151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed^{in support of the petition,the Highcourt maybe pleasedto} Oir..i tfr" iespondents^{t,.tb.Z to 4 io provide the information sought by the} p"tition", in its applicatio n^{dl,. 21tO9l2O2'1, pending disposalof the writ petition}

¶20

Counsel for the^{Petitioner: SRI.R'SUJAN KUMAR}

¶21

Counselforthe^{ResPondent Nos'1 & 2: GP FOR COOPERATIONAND GENERALADMINISTRATION DEPT}

¶22

Counsel^{for the RespondentNos'3& 4 : NONEAPPEARED}

¶23

The Court^{at the stage of admissionmade the followingORDER}

¶24

\ \

¶25

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY

¶26

WRIT PETITION No. 12943 ot 2022

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleaders for Cooperation and General Administration Departrnent appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.l and 2 respectively. With their consent, the present \'rit Petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itselt'.

¶29

Aggrieved by the action of the respondent Nos.2 and 4 in not providing the information sought by the petitioner vide his application dated 21 .09.2021 under the provisions of the Right To Information Act, 2005, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.

¶30

Learned Government Pleader on instructions has stated that the official respondents will fumish the required information on payment of necessary charges b1, the petitiorter

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioncr has stated that tlic petitioner has not been intimated the costs.

¶32

AAR' J 2 W.P.No.12g43^{of 2022}

¶33

¶34

Having^{regard to the above' without goinginto the} merits^{or demeritsof the case' this Writ Petition is disposedof} with the^{direction to the officialrespondentsto inform the} petitioner^{about the necessarycharges to be paid by him for} the^{purpose of fumishing the required intbrmation within a} period^{of one week fiom the date of receipt of a copy of this} order.^{on such intimation,the petitioner shall complywith the} same^{and the official respondentsshall furnishrequired} information^{to the petitionerwithina periodof two (2) weeks} thereafter.

¶35

Miscellaneousapplications,ifanypending,shallstand closed.^{There shallbe no order as to costs'}

¶36

¶37

SD/.G.SIREESHA ASSISrAut^ReotsrRnn //TRUE^COPY// SECTION^OFFICER To ihar, 1. 2 . . -conljffitrffl,:.Eft^{trfrt'#'#";'H#;k'}

¶38

\t I

¶39

¶40

The President, The President,^{AeronauticsEmployees.co-operative Housing Housingsociety}

¶41

The President, The President,^{AeronauticsEmployees.co-operative Housing Housingsociety} " iAicHsl, ied +26. HAL, Balanag'ar, Hv-derabad-.42' +. in" s"iiLt"rv^{ReronautitiEmpt6yees'Co-operative Housing society} (AECHS), TBC 476.

¶42

s. f*i"i[J't"-c-p^{;Oh COOPERATION, High Court for the State of Telansana} at Hvderabad. [OUT]

¶43

iild'cc;i;Gi^{Fof, cENERALADM|NlsrRArloNDEPT' Hish court ror} the State of Telan oana, [OUTI

¶44

One CC One CC CC^{to SRI.R.SRI.R.} "SUlntl XUttlnR, Advocate tOPUCI

¶45

One CC One CC CC^{to SRI.R.SRI.R.}

¶46

T,hro CD Copies

¶47

One spare^coPY

S.A S\V

{

HIGH COURT

DATED:21 10312022

ORDER

1
(
l
a)t) 2 6 JIJL 202 ,i
+'

¶56

WP.No.12943 of 2022

¶57

DISPOSING OF THE^W.P

¶58

AT THE STAGE OF^{ADMISSION WITHOUT COSTS.}

¶59

pi.l
#i

Patti Raja Gopal v. The Telangana State Information Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Patti Raja Gopal v. The Telangana State Information Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Chitirala Saraswathi Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Rakesh K. Patel Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Kanchi Seetha Ram Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

M/s Sri Kaustubha Housing Projects India Private Ltd. Vs The State of Telangana

S.M.Somasekhar Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Karingula Balanarasaiah , Balamnarsu Vs The Union of India and 4 Others