Susheel Dixit v. The Excise Commissioner And Others

30.06.2021 p.b.

Sl. No.1.

CIRCUIT BENCH OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT AT PORT BLAIR ANDAMAN & NICOBAR ISLANDS W.P.A. 174 of 2021 Shri Susheel Dixit Vs.

The Excise Commissioner & Ors.

(Via Video Conference) Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar.

.......for the petitioner.

Mr. Krishna Rao.

.......for the respondent.

The petitioner undertakes to affirm and stamp the petition as per the Rules within 48 hours of resumption of normal functioning of the Court. The petition is taken up through video conference on the basis of such undertaking.

Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties.

The petitioner has made a very simple prayer in this writ petition for direction upon the respondent no.3 to comply with the order passed by the respondent no.1 with

regard to the information in question filed under relevant provisions of R.T.I. Act.

Mr. Rao, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that petitioner should file appeal if he is aggrieved by the order passed by the respondent no.2. Such submission of the respondent no.2 is not tenable since the petitioner is not challenging the order passed by the respondent no.2. So, the question of going to appeal against the order passed by the appellate authority/respondent no.2 does not arise.

Considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent no.3 to comply with the order dated 3rd February, 2021 passed by the respondent no.2 within two weeks from the date of communication of this order. Accordingly, the application being WPA No.174 of 2021 is disposed of.

(Md. Nizamuddin, J.)