← Library
Madras High CourtWP/32986/2017disposed of

S. Rajendra Pandian v. The Public Information Officer

2018-02-15Honourable Mr Justice K. Ravichandrabaabu4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 15.02.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU Writ Petition No.32986 of 2017 S.Rajendra Pandian .. Petitioner Vs.

1. The Public Information Officer, Office of the Under Secretary to Government Social welfare and Nutritious Meal Programme Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2. The Appellate Authority, Office of the Deputy Secretary to Government, Social Welfare and Nutritious Meal Programme Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

3. The Public Information Officer, Office of the Deputy Director (Admn.) Department of Social Defence, No.300, Purasaiwalkam High Road, Chennai - 600 010.

...Respondents

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for records connected with the Proceedings issued in No.7430/A1/2017

dated 05.07.2017 passed by the 3rd respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to furnish the details which was sought by the petitioner on 15.05.2017 and as per the Letter issued by the 1st respondent issued in Government Letter issued in Letter NO.7418/SaNa8(2)/2017-1 dated 29.05.2017.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ilamvaludhi For Respondents : Mr.Niranjan Rajagopal, for R1 to R3.

O R D E R

The petitioner is aggrieved against the proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 05.07.2017 rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under the R.T.I seeking for certain information.

2. Heard both sides.

3. It is seen that the petitioner has already preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent challenging the order passed by the 3rd respondent. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also fairly submits that the said appeal is posted on 02.03.2018.

4. When such being the position, maintaining the present writ petition any more does not arise, more particularly, when the petitioner has already chosen to work out his remedy before the Appellate

Authority against the very same impugned order. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of without expressing any view on the merits of the matter, however, by granting liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy before the Appellate Authority. No costs. 15.02.2018 Speaking/Non Speaking Index : Yes/No vsi To

1. The Public Information Officer, Office of the Under Secretary to Government Social welfare and Nutritious Meal Programme Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2. The Appellate Authority, Office of the Deputy Secretary to Government, Social Welfare and Nutritious Meal Programme Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

3. The Public Information Officer, Office of the Deputy Director (Admn.) Department of Social Defence, No.300, Purasaiwalkam High Road, Chennai - 600 010.

K.RAVICHANDRABAABU,J.

Vsi W.P.No.32986 of 2017 15.02.2018