V.Krishnamurthi, v. The Chief Information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 5.9.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM W.A.No.1917 of 2018 V.Krishnamurthi Appellant

Versus

1. The Chief Information Commissioner State Information Commission No.2 Sir Thiyagarajar Salai Near Alaiyammal Koil Teynampet Chennai-600 018 2 The Public Information Officer & Personal Assistant to District Supply Officer Collector's Office Thanjavur Respondents Prayer: Writ Appeal filed filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 10.11.2016 passed in W.P.No.39281 of 2016 on the file of this court.

Prayer in WP 39281/2016 Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records connected with the order dated 30.05.2016 in case No. 20845/C/2011 and quash the same and direct the respondents to take appropriate action u/s.20(1) and section 20(2) of the Right to Information Act. For appellant : Ms.D.Asenthamani For respondents : Mr.P.S.Sivashanmugasundaram Special Government Pleader

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the court was made by HULUVADI G.RAMESH, J.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr.P.S.Sivashanmugasundaram, learned Special Government Pleader, who takes notice on behalf of the respondents. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. It appears that the appellant had sought for some information under the Right to Information Act and reply for the same was furnished belatedly and in that regard, the appellant had claimed for initiating action against the official, who is alleged to have erred by not furnishing the information in time, but, such a claim of the appellant was closed by the authorities by observing that the application seeking information was not originally received by the authority because of furnishing of wrong address, which resulted in the delay of furnishing the information. Not satisfied with the same, the appellant had moved the writ court.

3. Appreciating the above aspects, the learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition. But, still, the appellant seeks to harp on the issue without there being any cause. In that view of the matter, the writ appeal is dismissed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ssk.

To:

1 The Chief Information Commissioner State Information Commission No.2 Sir Thiyagarajar Salai Near Alaiyammal Koil Teynampet Chennai-600 018 2 The Public Information Officer & Personal Assistant to District Supply Officer Collector's Office Thanjavur.

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.62142 W.A.No.1917 of 2018 AK(CO) rrs 23/10/2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/