Rep. by their GPA Holder D.Pratapchander Reddy v. The Defence Estates Officer-cum-Central Public Information Officer, Under Right to Information act

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the order dated 14.3.2008 of the respondent estate officer as illegal, arbitrary and untenable and consequently direct the respondent to issue certified copies of the proceedings in respect of Bunglow Nos. 2, 43, 205 and 206 wherein those buildings were declared as private property, and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:SRINIVASA RAO PUTLURI Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY W.P.NO.9244 OF 2008

O R D E R; This writ petition has been filed by M.V.Preetam Reddy and three others assailing the action of the respondent in rejecting the application filed by them seeking grant of certified copies of certain proceedings in respect of bungalow bearing No.243, 205 and 206.

The application filed by the petitioners came to be rejected by the respondent on the ground that the orders are made by the Government of India, Ministry of Defence and therefore, he is not competent to issue certified copies of the proceedings. The relevant portion of the letter addressed by the respondent reads as hereunder:

On perusal of application dated 11.2.2008 of Sri D.Pratapchander Reddy, it is seen that the applicant requested to furnish certified copies of the proceedings and order made in r/o bungalow bearing Nos 2, 205, 206 and 403. As per our records there is no Bungalow bearing No.403 is in existence. Regarding certified copies it is stated that the proceedings and orders are made by the Government of India, Ministry of Defence and not by this office since these orders are originated from Government of India, Ministry of Defence, we cannot certify copies; therefore, the applicant is advised to approach the Government for certified copies.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the respondent.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the document sought for is very much essential to substantiate his claim over bungalow No.219/1 of Old Staff lines, Gymkhana Road, Secunderabad.

Learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the respondent submits that the petitioner has moved an application under the Right to Information Act and the petitioners have to work out their remedies as provided thereunder. Under Section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005, a forum is available to the petitioners. The petitioners are at liberty to invoke the appellate authority as proved under Section 19 of the said Act, if they have any grievance.