Bikash Kumar Mukherjee v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

D/L. 9.

December 15, 2023.

MNS.

WPA No. 20683 of 2022 Bikash Kumar Mukherjee Vs.

The State of West Bengal and others Mr. Rabi Sankar Chattopadhyay, Mr. Sayan Chattopadhyay, Ms. Trisha Rakshit ... for the petitioner.

Mr. Sujit Sankar Koley ...for the WBSEDCL.

1. Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be kept on record.

2. The grievance of the petitioner, who is an advocate who had apparently worked for the West Bengal Electricity Distribution Company Limited (WBSEDCL), is that the petitioner sought information regarding clearance of his bills. No information having been given, the petitioner approached the respondent no. 3, that is, the State Chief Information Commissioner with an appeal under the Right to Information Act, 2005, which has been kept pending.

3. Learned counsel for the WBSEDCL submits that the appropriate authority from whom the

information was to be asked was not The Assistant Public Information Officer, who was approached by the petitioner, but the Senior Manager, Human Resources and Administrative Officer, Baharampore Zone, who is entrusted with the said power.

4. It is further contended that in respect of the bills, the petitioner had placed the bills from time to time at the office of RM, Nadia Region whereas the appropriate authority was the Nodal Officer or any other official of WBSEDCL.

5. Be that as it may, since the petitioner's present grievance pertains to information not being furnished and an appeal is already pending, WPA No. 20683 of 2022 is disposed of by directing the respondent no. 3, that is, the State Chief Information Commissioner, to decide the appeal of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within January 31, 2024.

6. It is further made clear that nothing in this order shall preclude the petitioner from approaching the Senior Manager, Human Resources & Administrative Officer, Baharampore Zone seeking appropriate

information without prejudice to his rights in the appeal as well as to approach the appropriate Nodal Officer or any other official of WBSEDCL with his bills for work done by him, appending therewith documents to substantiate his claims.

7. If such approaches are made, the above authorities shall deal with the same independently and irrespective of the decision arrived at by the appellate authority, that is, the respondent no. 3.

8. There will be no order as to costs.

9. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities. (Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)