Velayutham At Karuppan Chettiyar v. The Central Information Commissioner

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.04.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH (Through Video Conferencing) Velayutham @ Karuppan Chettiyar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Central Information Commissioner, O/o. Central Information Commission CIC, Bhawan, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi 110 067 2.The Central Public Information Officer, Canara Bank, Marketing Division, 118 West Perumal Mason Street Madurai & District.

3.The Central Public Information Officer/the Chief Manager, Canara Bank Chekkanurani Branch Thirumangalam Taluk Madurai District.

... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to comply the order of the 1st respondent dated 17.11.2020 within a time that may be stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner :Ms.R.Karthika

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of mandamus directing the second and third respondents to comply with the order passed by the first respondent on 17.11.2020 within a time frame fixed by this Court.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner submitted an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 to the third respondent seeking for certain information. The reply given by the 1/3

third respondent was not to the satisfaction of the petitioner and hence, the petitioner filed an appeal before the second respondent. No order was passed on the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a second appeal before the first respondent.

3. The first respondent, on considering the facts and circumstances of the case, passed an order on 17.11.2020 by directing the third respondent to revisit the RTI application and provide a revised reply/information to the petitioner. The first respondent fixed a time limit of three weeks to the third respondent to provide the revised reply/information.

4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the third respondent has not complied with the order passed by the first respondent and left with no other option, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.

5. Taking into consideration the nature of relief sought for in this writ petition, this Court thought it fit that final orders can be passed, even without issuing notice to the second and third respondents, since this Court is going to direct the third respondent to comply with the order passed by the first respondent.

6. In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the third respondent to comply with the order passed by the first respondent dated 17.11.2020 within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation to the third respondent along with all relevant documents and also a copy of this order.

7. The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI ACT) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) RR Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned. 2/3

To 1.The Central Information Commissioner, O/o. Central Information Commission CIC, Bhawan, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi 110 067 2.The Central Public Information Officer, Canara Bank, Marketing Division, 118 West Perumal Mason Street Madurai & District.

3.The Central Public Information Officer/the Chief Manager, Canara Bank Chekkanurani Branch Thirumangalam Taluk Madurai District.

+1 CC to M/s.R.KARTHIKA, Advocate ( SR-15401[F] dated 07/04/2021 ) 07.04.2021 RK (27.04.2021) 3P 5C 3/3