K.Vasantha Rani v. Central Public Information Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 06.08.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN K.Vasantha Rani ... Petitioner -Vs1. Central Public Information Officer, Indian Bank, Corporate Office, 66, Rajaji Salai, 5th Floor, Main Building, Chennai-1.

2. The Branch Manager, Indian Bank, Mettupalayam Branch, Mettupalayam, Pondicherry.

3. The Information Commissioner, Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi-110 067 ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records relating to the impugned order of the first respondent in his order No.Ref.Co.RTI.CIC.117830:2022-23/1670 dated 26.09.2022 and quash the same as highly illegal and consequentially direct the first and second

respondent to comply with the order of the third respondent in Second Appeal No.CIC/IBANK/A/2020/117830 dated 25.08.2022. For Petitioner : Mr.J.Zeakumar

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the first respondent dated 26.09.2022, thereby rejected the request made by the petitioner as directed by the third respondent.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

3. The petitioner's son K.V.Loganathan met with an accident and died as bachelor. The petitioner, being the mother of the deceased knows very well that her son was having account in the second respondent bank. However, she could not find any account number. Therefore, she sought for information under the Right to Information Act, with the Information Officer of the second respondent about her son's account and other details. However, it was rejected and aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the first respondent and it was also dismissed.

Aggrieved by the same, once again the petitioner preferred an appeal before the third respondent. The third respondent, by an order dated 22.07.2022, directed the second respondent to permit the petitioner to inspect the account related to her deceased son. It was further directed to the respondents to facilitate the inspection of the relevant records pertaining to the account of the petitioner's son on a mutually decided date and time and provide certified copies of the documents.

4. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation in order to comply with the order passed by the third respondent. However, by the reply dated 26.09.2022, the petitioner was informed that no account is existing in the name of late Shri K V Loganathan S/o Kuppusamy i.e. the son of the petitioner herein. Further, the petitioner also did not provide any account number or any material to show that her son was having an account with the second respondent.

5. Admittedly, the petitioner did not possess any evidence to show

that the petitioner's son was having account with the second respondent. While being so, this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the first respondent and the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

6. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 06.08.2024 Internet: Yes Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order mn

To

1. Central Public Information Officer, Indian Bank, Corporate Office, 66, Rajaji Salai, 5th Floor, Main Building, Chennai-1.

2. The Branch Manager, Indian Bank, Mettupalayam Branch, Mettupalayam, Pondicherry.

3. The Information Commissioner, Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi-110 067

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J, mn 06.08.2024