Hazarath Ameeruddin College of Education v. The Government of A.P & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Hence, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the
Provisions considered
Judgment
Operative part
to the first respondent with a request to furnish the information as to the annual budget expenditure incurred for Rayapati Venkata Ranga Rao College of Education or any Government College of Education. This application was filed under Section 6 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short ‘the Act’). The petitioner states that on receipt of its application, the first respondent forwarded it to the second respondent, who, in turn, had called for information from the third respondent, but, so far, the information has not been furnished and seeks appropriate directions in this regard. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the first respondent. The Act not only provides for the procedure in the matter of furnishing information, but also prescribes the remedies in case the request of an applicant is not acceded to. If the request of the petitioner for furnishing information has not been complied with, it has a remedy to approach the State Information Commissioner under Section 18(1) (c) of the Act. When an effective alternative remedy is provided, this Court cannot entertain the writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail the remedy under Section 18(1) (c) of the Act. There shall be no other as to costs.
22.06.2007 ____________
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Hence, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Right to Information Act, 2005 — s. 6.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 22 Jun 2007. The bench was L NARASIMHA REDDY.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.