The Registrar/Appellate Authority v. The State Information Commissioner, A.P. Information Commission, Hyderabad
Case at a glance
- Order date
- 23 Nov 2010
- Bench
- C V NAGARJUNA REDDY
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
The Registrar/Appellate Authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005 Sri Venkateswara Veterinary University, Tirupati .. Petitioner
And The State Information Commissioner, A.P. Information Commission, Hyderabad another .. Respondents
Counsel for petitioner :
Sri Aka Venkataramana Counsel for respondent No.1 : None Counsel for respondent No.2 : Sri Vedula Srinivas The Court made the following : : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.2111 of 2009
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed for a certiorari to quash order dated 31-12-2008 in Appeal No.5953/SIC-ASR/2008 of respondent No.1. I have heard Sri Aka Venkataramana, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Vedula Srinivas, learned counsel representing respondent No.2. The proceedings by which the petitioners purportedly felt aggrieved emanated from respondent No.1 by way of an order passed in an appeal filed against the orders of the petitioners. As rightly objected by respondent No.2 in his counter affidavit and pressed into service during the course of submissions made by Sri Vedula Srinivas representing him, petitioners 1 and 2, being the functionaries under the provisions of the Right to Information Act 2005 who are entrusted with the functions of passing appropriate orders on the applications for furnishing information and supply of documents, cannot be said to be aggrieved persons against the order passed by respondent No.1. Indeed, the petitioners are placed in the position of quasi judicial functionaries and if at all it is only Sri Venkateswara Veterinary University which was directed to furnish the information under the impugned order that can be stated to be the aggrieved party. Therefore, in my opinion, the Writ Petition filed by the petitioners cannot be maintained and the same is accordingly dismissed, however with liberty to the University to avail appropriate remedy at its option. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP No.2671/2009 and WVMP No.2523/2010 are disposed of as infructuous. Date: 23-11-2010 AM _________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY.,J
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Right to Information Act, 2005.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 23 Nov 2010. The bench was C V NAGARJUNA 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.