K.Govinda Krishnan v. The District Collector

W.M.P. No.32875 of 2025 in W.P.No.29330 of 2025 M.SUNDAR, J.

and T. VINOD KUMAR, J.

[Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.] This order will now dispose of the captioned 'Writ Miscellaneous Petition' [hereinafter 'WMP' for the sake of brevity]. 2.

Captioned WMP has been filed with prayer to dispense with production of 'original impugned order dated 01.02.2025 issued by first respondent' [hereinafter 'impugned order' for the sake of brevity, convenience and clarity].

3.

Mr. P. Vijendran, learned counsel on record for writ petitioner, is before this Court.

4.

Learned counsel for writ petitioner, adverting to writ support affidavit, submitted that the writ petitioner was not a party to the proceedings before the first respondent and therefore, the impugned order was not communicated to him. Hence, according to the learned counsel, the writ petitioner obtained the same under the Right to Information Act, 2005, due to which, the impugned order could not be filed in original. Learned counsel drew the attention of this Court to relevant part of support affidavit in W.P.No.29330 of 2025, which reads as follows: Page Nos.1/3

M.SUNDAR, J.

and T. VINOD KUMAR, J.

cad '18. That I am not party to the proceedings before the 1st respondent and therefore the impugned order was not communicated to me. Therefore, I gave a letter under the Right to Information Act, 2005 and requested to issue a copy of the impugned order. Accordingly, the 3rd respondent issued a reply dated 07.03.2025 along with the photo copy of the impugned order dated 01.02.2025.'

5.

In the light of the narrative thus far, dispense with prayer is acceded to. Captioned WMP is ordered as prayed for. [M.S.,J.] [T.V.K.,J.] 06.08.2025 cad in W.P.No.29330 of 2025 (1/2) Page Nos.2/3

Page Nos.3/3