Rupali W/O Nutansingh Chaddi v. State Of Maharashtra, Through Principal Secretary, General Administration, Mumbai And 2 Others

1 wp3551.14.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.3551 OF 2014 [Rupali w/o Nutansingh Chaddi .vs. State of Maharashtra and others] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Vivek Awchat, counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. B.H. Dangre, Government Pleader for respondent no.1. ......

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND A.M. BADAR, JJ.

DATED : MARCH 31, 2015.

By this petition, the petitioner challenges the Government Circular, by which the appellate authority, under the Right to Information Act, is sought to be located at a place, other than the place where the appellant resides. The said circular is challenged by the petitioner on the ground that the Right to Information Act has been brought into force for the convenience and benefit of the persons seeking the information and with the location of the appellate authority at a place other than the place where the appellant ordinarily resides would not be in the interest of the appellant. Mrs. Dangre, the learned Government Pleader states, on instructions, that the Government has now decided to conduct the hearing of the appeals by video conferencing, so that appellants, who are desirous of arguing their cases personally could do it, through video conferencing. It is stated that the video conferencing facility would be made available within a period of six weeks.

In view of the statement made on behalf of the respondents, the grievance of the petitioner should stand redressed. The petitioner and the other appellants would be entitled to work out their appeals through the facility of video conferencing. There would be no reason to quash and set aside the impugned circular, as the

2 wp3551.14.odt grievance of the petitioner and the other appellants stands redressed, as they could avail the facility of video conferencing and work out the matters from the places where they reside. In regard to exchange of documents, the same could be sent by the appellants to the appellate authority through the post and vice versa.

In the aforesaid circumstances, we dispose of the writ petition with no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE Gulande