T.Devadasan v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.11.2021 C O R A M THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY W.P.No.3186 of 2017 T.Devadasan

...Petitioner

Vs

1. The District Collector, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram.

2. Tamil Nadu Information Commission, Rep. by its Registrar, No.2, Thiyagarayar Road, Eldams Road Junction, Teynampet,Chennai -600 018.

3. M.Ezhumalai Public Information Officer/Special Tahsildar, Zone -XII,Chennai Corporation, Chennai -16.

4. Pragatha, Personal Assistant, District Revenue Officer, Tambaram, Chennai.

5. Arulanandhan, Tahsildar, Tamil Nadu Urban Development Scheme, Poonamallee.

6. Madhavan Special Tahsildhar, Sriperumbudhur Scheme Irungkattukottai.

...Respondents

Prayer Writ Petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India, prayed for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to take action against the respondents 3 to 6 to implement the order passed by the Tamil Nadu Information Commission vide order dated 08.02.2016 in Case No.34490/Reenquiry/D/2014 (45783/D/14).

For Petitioner :

Mr.Karthick Srinath for Mr.K.M.Vijayan Associates For R1 :

Mr.V.Nanmaran Additional Government Pleader For R2 :

Mr.Niranjan Rajagopalan for M/s. G.R. Associates

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to take action against the respondents 3 to 6 to implement the order passed by the Tamil Nadu Information Commission vide order dated 08.02.2016 in Case No.34490/Re-enquiry/D/2014 (45783/D/14). 2.When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent would submit that, subsequent to the order passed by the second respondent, the first respondent issued show cause notice dated 31.03.2016, to the respondents 3 to 6 calling for the explanation and their explanations were obtained and report was also sent to the second respondent vide official letter dated 31.05.2016. Therefore, the matter has become infructuous. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner does not raised any objection to the submission made by the learned Additional Government Pleader.

4.In view of the above submission, this Court is of the view that, subsequent to the order passed by the second respondent - Information Commissioner, the first respondent has issued show cause notice to the respondents 3 to 6, calling for the explanations and the same was obtained and the report was also sent to the second respondent. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the view that, no further direction is required to the first respondent, once again to take appropriate action. 5.Hence, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No cost. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-IX) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar rst

To:

1. The District Collector, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram.

2. The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Information Commission, No.2, Thiyagarayar Road, Eldams Road Junction, Teynampet,Chennai -600 018.

3. The Public Information Officer/Special Tahsildar, Zone-XII, Chennai Corporation, Chennai - 16

4. The Personal Assistant, District Revenue Officer, Tambaram, Chennai.

5. The Tahsildar, Tamilnadu Urban Development Scheme, Poonamallee.

6. The Special Tahsildar, Sriperumbudhur Scheme, Irungkattukottai.

+1cc to M/s.G.R.Associates, Advocate, S.R.No.60457 W.P.No.3186 of 2017 GPL(CO) RGA(09/12/2021)(04/01/2022)