Harishkanna v. The Principal (Pio Under Rti Act, 2005)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 01.12.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN W.P.No.15159 of 2021 Harishkanna ..Petitioner/Party in Person Vs

1. The Principal (PIO under RTI Act, 2005) Dr.VGN Matric School, Kalavai, Ranipet Dt.-632 506

2. The Correspondent (FAA under RTI Act, 2005) Dr.VGN Matric School, Kalavai, Ranipet Dt. 632 506 ..Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to furnish the documents as mentioned in the application dated 14th June, 2021.

For Petitioner : Mr.Harishkanna Party-in-person For Respondents : Mr.V.Karthikeyan

O R D E R

The petitioner has come up with the writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent School to furnish certain documents as requested by him under RTI application dated 14.06.2021.

2. According to the petitioner, the Public Information Officer and the First Appellate Authority failed to perform their duties as per the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 and hence, forcing the petitioner to file the present writ petition.

2. The petitioner claims himself as one of the teaching staff and was working in the School from 2018 to September, 2020. According to him, though he was employed as a member of the teaching faculty, unilaterally he was changed from teaching staff category to non-teaching staff category. According to him, he was a graduate in Engineering and he was in fact, taking 10 subjects to the students studying in U.K.G. to VIII standard. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. The averments in the affidavit appeared to be completely disjoined and jumbled up, bereft of any sense at all. What could be gathered is that the petitioner seems to be having a strong axe to grind against the management of the School, for a brief period he had worked in the School. This Court, despite spending some time, could not make any legal sense in the entirety of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. In any event, the petitioner, whether entitled to be furnished information in terms of the provisions of the RTI Act or not and the same having not furnished, has approached this Court seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus. There are provisions under the Right to Information Act providing appellate remedies and by-passing the same, Writ of Mandamus would not lie and the same is not maintainable.

4. Moreover, the affidavit contains several irrelevant facts and it is completely incoherent to make out any sense at all. The petitioner appears to have also quoted some provisions of the Evidence Act and some case laws which appear to be the result of his half baked knowledge without any seriousness that could be attached to the same.

5. On the whole, this Court finds that the affidavit is to be rejected outright as being completely bereft of any substance for this Court to entertain even for a second. The Writ Petition is therefore stands dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vsi To

1. The Principal (PIO under RTI Act, 2005) Dr.VGN Matric School, Kalavai, Ranipet Dt.-632 506

2. The Correspondent (FAA under RTI Act, 2005) Dr.VGN Matric School, Kalavai, Ranipet Dt. 632 506.

+1cc to Mr.V.Karthikeyan, Advocate, S.R.No.62864 W.P.No.15159 of 2021 GJ[co] NSK 14/12/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/