Saudagar Mohammad Rafi v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another
*1*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.12223 OF 2021 SAUDAGAR MOHAMMAD RAFI
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Shri Magar Pankajkumar S. AGP for the Respondents/ State : Shri S.G. Sangle ...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & S.G. DIGE, JJ.
DATE :- 28th March, 2022 Per Court :- 1.
The petitioner claims to be an RTI activist and appears to be the Chief Editor and Founder President of the Trust by name, "Anyay, Atyachar, Bhrashtachar Virodhi Samiti", Valandi, Taluka Devani, District Latur.
2.
By this petition, the petitioner has put forth amended prayer clauses B and C (without leave of the Court) as under :- "B.
Be pleased to issue writ of mandamus/ certiorari and direct to the Respondent No.2 to impose penalties/ take action against the concerned Public Information Officers and concerned First Appellate Officers under Section 20(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, and also to take disciplinary action as stipulated under section 20(2) of the Right to
*2* Information Act, 2005 against them.
C.
Be pleased to direct Respondent No.2 to decide all the pending Second Appeals (as early as possible) of the petitioner and also to provide/ supply the information sought by the petitioner in the respective matters...." (List of appeals is given).
3.
We find from the pleadings in the petition that same are totally haphazard. In all, 13 Second Appeals filed in 2018 and the judgments delivered therein are impugned. Further, 18 Second Appeals and the dates of hearing are mentioned. Another list of 38 Second Appeals filed in 2017, 2018 and 2019 and dates of orders are set out and a further list of 24 Second Appeals, which are pending, are enlisted. All these appeals have been bundled up in a single writ petition. We can hardly co-relate the pleadings set out in the memo of the petition with the pending Second Appeals or the orders passed in the Second Appeals. Not a single application filed under the RTI is placed on record. From page 25 till page 314 are various Second Appeals filed by the petitioner, as can be seen from the list of documents. 4.
The grievance of the petitioner seems to be that his several Second Appeals are pending. Even the prayers are casually drafted.
*3* 5.
Considering the above, this Writ Petition is disposed off by permitting the petitioner to deal with his individual pending proceedings as is prescribed in law. If the pending proceedings are not being heard, he is at liberty to approach the said authority by issuing reminders and seek early hearing. In the event, he is aggrieved by any specific order passed by the competent authority in a specific matter, he is at liberty to avail a remedy as is available in law.
kps (S.G. DIGE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)