Rajeev Agrawal v. State Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR.

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4732/2016 RAJEEV AGRAWAL ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Vedanta Varma, Adv.

Versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC with Mr.

Shatrajit Banerji, Adv. for R-1 & 2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH

O R D E R

% 23.05.2016 1.

This petition by way of public interest litigation has been filed with the following prayers:- "a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s), order(s) or directions to the Government of NCT of Delhi to create centralized RTI website for submission of RTI request and 1st appeal online and payment of RTI fees thereupon, as a universal access point for submitting RTI requests through internet in respect of every Public Authority functioning under Government of NCT of Delhi; and b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s), order(s) or directions to the Government of NCT of Delhi to online transfer RTI requests, 1st appeal and complaints through internet while following Section 6(3) of the RTI Act in respect of every Public Authority functioning under Government of NCT of Delhi; and c) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s), order(s) or directions to the Government of NCT of Delhi to create the facility to upload the RTI

application/appeal/complaint responses online in respect of every Public Authority functioning under Government of NCT of Delhi; and d) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s), order(s) or directions to the Government of NCT of Delhi for constituting Call Centre as voice facilitation Centre for filing RTI applications and appeals over the phone; "

2.

The very same issues were raised by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.896/2014 filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India which was disposed of by the Supreme Court of India directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.04.2014. The grievance of the petitioner appears to be that in spite of repeated reminders, the respondents failed to consider his representation. 3.

Sh. Gautam Narayan, the learned ASC who accepted notice for the respondents on instruction states that the petitioner's representation would be considered and appropriate order would be passed in accordance with law. We direct that such an order shall be passed within three months from today and the same shall be communicated to the petitioner. 4.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. CHIEF JUSTICE JAYANT NATH, J MAY 23, 2016/pmc W.P.(C)4732/2016