VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2023 › High Court of Madras

Vijay Anand .S v. The Chief Information Commissioner

DISPOSED OF
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
7 November 2023
Bench
G.R.Swaminathanauthor
Case no.
WP(MD) 26672/2023

Judgment

ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State Information Commission.

¶2The Information Commission is called upon to pass order on the petitioner's Second Appeal on merits and in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶3This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.

07.11.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No MGA To

1.The Chief Information Commissioner, State Information Commission, No.2, Sir Thiyagarayar Salai, Elthamas Road Junction, Adjacent Alayaman Koil, Chennai.

2.The Appellate Information Officer, Raj Bhavan, Tamil Nadu Governor's Office, Chennai, Tamil Nadu – 600 022.

3.The Public Information Officer, Raj Bhavan, Tamil Nadu Governor's Office, Chennai, Tamil Nadu – 600 022.

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. MGA

07.11.2023

Case details

Parties and counsel

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 07.11.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN S.Vijay Anand ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Chief Information Commissioner, State Information Commission, No.2, Sir Thiyagarayar Salai, Elthamas Road Junction, Adjacent Alayaman Koil, Chennai. 2.The Appellate Information Officer, Raj Bhavan, Tamil Nadu Governor's Office, Chennai, Tamil Nadu – 600 022. 3.The Public Information Officer, Raj Bhavan, Tamil Nadu Governor's Office, Chennai, Tamil Nadu – 600 022. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider and pass order on petitioner's Second Appeal dated 12.10.2020 preferred under Section 19(3) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 by considering petitioner's Second Appeal within the time stipulated by this Court, consequently impose the penalty against the respondents for non furnishing the information to the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Prakash For Respondents : Mr.Raguvaran Gopalan Standing Counsel for R.1

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.