D.Vijaylakshmi v. State Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.07.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE N.MALA D.Vijayalakshmi .. petitioner vs 1.State rep by The State Information Commissioner Tamil Nadu Information Commission Block No.19, Government Farm village Panepet, Nandanam, Chennai - 600035.
2.Mr.C.Sathish Kumar, The Appellate Authority cum Superintendent Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Tatabad, Coimbatore - 641012.
3.Mr.s.Vasantha Murali The Public Information Officer/Executive Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Tatabad, Coimbatore - 641012.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to dispose 1/5
the second appeal dated 10.05.2025 filed under Section 19(3) of RTI Act, within the time fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mrs.D.Vijayalakshmi (party-in-person) For Respondents : Mr.C.Vigneshwaran, Standing Counsel Mr.L.Jaivenkatesh, Standing Counsel
O R D E R
This writ petition is filed to direct the 1st respondent to dispose the petitioner's second appeal dated 10.05.2025, filed under Section 19(3) of RTI Act.
2. The petitioner filed an application under Section 6 of the RTI Act to the 3rd respondent on 19.02.2025, seeking information and copies of documents pertaining to action taken against the officials with regard to illegal dismantling of electricity line, pursuant to the order dated 31.05.2023 of the first respondent in NC.2269/C/2022 (SA.1064/C/2022). In reply, to the said application, the 3rd respondent, furnished misleading and malafide information. The petitioner therefore preferred a first appeal under Section 19(1) of the RTI Act, to the 2nd respondent. In reply, the 2nd respondent provided information only in respect of one query and furnished misleading 2/5
and malafide information in respect of the other four queries. Hence, the petitioner preferred second appeal to the first respondent on 10.05.2025, under section 19(3) of the Act. Since, the first respondent kept the appeal pending, without any justification, the petitioner filed the present writ petition for the aforesaid relief.
3. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the second appeal of the petitioner was taken on file and numbered as SA.No.7646 of 2025. The counsel therefore sought time to dispose of the second appeal.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record. With consent of both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal.
5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering that the petitioner is a senior citizen, aged about 72 years, a direction is issued to the first respondent, to dispose of the petitioner's second appeal in 3/5
SA.No.7646 of 2025 on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
24.07.2025 Speaking order / Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No : Yes / No tsh To 1.State rep by The State Information Commissioner Tamil Nadu Information Commission Block No.19, Government Farm village Panepet, Nandanam, Chennai - 600035.
2.Mr.C.Sathish Kumar, The Appellate Authority cum Superintendent Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Tatabad, Coimbatore - 641012.
3.Mr.s.Vasantha Murali The Public Information Officer/Executive Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Tatabad, Coimbatore - 641012.
4/5
N. MALA , J.
tsh 24.07.2025 5/5