Sayyed Riyaz S/O Syed Riyasatali v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Ministry Of Revenue And Forest Dept. Mumbai And Others

WP2228-16 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.2228/2016 (SYED RIYAZ ZSYED RIYASATALI VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri A.J. Thakkar, counsel for the petitioner. Shri P.S. Tembhare, A.G.P. for the R-1, 3 & 4. CORAM : SMT.VASANTI A. NAIK AND V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATE : APRIL 20 , 2016.

If the petitioner was aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the Information Officer to comply with the order, as directed by the second Appellate Authority under the Right To Information Act, 2005, the petitioner ought to have approached this Court seeking a direction to the Information Officer to supply the information by implementing the order of the second Appellate Authority. However, this was not done and the petitioner filed a complaint under Section 18 of the Right To Information Act, 2005. Since there is no remedy provided under the Act of 2005 for implementation of the orders of the second Appellate Authority, the petitioner ought to have availed an appropriate remedy.

The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner may avail the appropriate remedy and he may be permitted to withdraw this writ petition.

Permission to withdraw the writ petition is granted. The writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn. The points raised in the petition are kept open. JUDGE JUDGE APTE