S.Ravi shankar v. Bhava, Opp: Public

The petitioner states that he filed an application dated

29.08.2006 under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) before the 2nd respondent, namely the Registrar-cum-Public Information Officer, Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupathi, praying to issue certified copies of all the bills, vouchers of payment (certificates thereon given by various officials) made by Prof. S. Jayarami Reddy (Vice-Chancellor) as Principal of S.V.U. College of Arts and Science for various purchases and works during his tenure as Principal of the said college, from out of the college special fee account and college development fund account, along with sanction orders and connected note file copies for the above mentioned payment. As the said request of the petitioner was not complied, he filed an appeal, dated

06.10.2006, before the Vice Chancellor, S.V. University, Tirupati, but even the same was not acted upon. Thereupon, the petitioner filed an appeal before the 1st respondent, namely the Commissioner, A.P. Information Commission, who vide orders in No.2140/SIC-ASR/2006, dated 27.01.2007, disposed of the appeal of the petitioner, observing that as the Registrar had made all records available on 31.10.2006 for inspection by the petitioner, his request for furnishing of copies, cannot be acceded. Hence, he filed the present writ petition The grievance of the petitioner is that though he preferred appeal to the 1st respondent under the Right to Information Act, 2005, for issuance of certified copies of the documents as specified above, the 1st respondent on the ground that the Registrar had made available the records to him for inspection, refused to direct the University to furnish the copies of the documents sought for by him, and the said action of the 1st respondent is contrary to the provisions of the Act, and prayed that the impugned orders passed by the respondents be set aside and direction be given to the University to furnish the copies of the documents, as sought for by him.

Heard the party-in-person, learned counsel for the 1st respondent and the learned Standing counsel for the 2nd respondent.

Learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent contended that the request of the petitioner seeking certified copies of certain documents is very vague, he does not clearly specify the documents that he requires, and under such circumstances, it is not possible for the University, to furnish the certified copies of the documents required by the petitioner. He further submitted that the Correspondent of the College, is willing to furnish the copies of the documents sought by the petitioner, provided he furnishes the details of the documents, such as its proceeding numbers and dates.

The request made by the petitioner, admittedly, is very vague. Inasmuch as the University has agreed to make available the documents to the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions:

The Correspondent of S.V.U. College of Arts and Science, shall make available the bills, vouchers of payment made by the Principal, S.V.U. College of Arts and Sciences, for the period from 01.05.2002 to 31.05.2004 under College Development Fund Account and College Special Fee Account, along with sanction orders and connected note file copies for the above mentioned payments, to enable the petitioner to inspect those documents. The petitioner, upon perusing the records, shall identify the documents required by him, and furnish the details thereof to the authorities of the College, to enable them to furnish the same, in accordance with law.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs.

03.11.2008 ksr / v v ______________ N.V.RAMANA,J