High Court Karnataka High Court

State Public Information Officer vs N Anbarasm on 26 August, 2009

Karnataka High Court
State Public Information Officer vs N Anbarasm on 26 August, 2009
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar

5  

5 I' 
-- I ~   /2;

E a 



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATA KA AT BANGALOQE

DATED THIS THE 26"' my OF AUGUST  

BEFORE 2

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE MOHAl\i*,SH;€\M'Ti4:\iA/.$fOi}b'AR"'4.jé. %

wan pgjrrrom No.941is/zoos ceM.aE5;  

Between :

State Public Information Officer. V ~ 
8: Deputy Registrar (Estabiishiiierifl * 
The High Court of Kamataka ' * " '
High Court Building,   , "
Dr.Ambedkar V€:'edi1_i--«.  b   V.  
Banga1ore-560     ~   .. Petitioner

( By Sri N.=;iganai1tié;;vVS;:';§Z?ou<:1o'eI._ for f

Sriranga 'Assoc1'at_eS~)f v,  _ 

AND :

2  iiiiii H
Re_sidir1g. at Appie4VSOft,
No.3o9,"io$tCr_o's-5 " V _ Q
15' Main", --.ShiVar1;3gar,V

  'Nest of Chord. Road,
 Bangalore'-'56!) 0'10. .. Respondent

' " '{ By Sr:;\I.Afibarasan, Party-in--person }



This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 8: .227 of the
Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated

14.5.2008 [Annexure--G) passed by the Karnataka Infozinahtioizvvp

Commission.

This Writ Petition coming on for hearingtpthi-sop  llpthewl  0 

Court made the following :

ORDER

Heard the learned advocates aippeafingl on of

parties and perused the stateInentVl4l’oI_l”1:objections lfilledlfiby the

respondent.

2. Petitionerpphas the order at
Annexure-‘G’ the Karnataka
Information _ Egtate Chief Information
Commissioner .li’asfid£.1’fectedl”‘thpe’*–.petitioner to furnish certain

records free of cost to thellcoinplainant.

3.V-‘:c_j’l’l1e..erestpondenthelrein filed an application before the

P{f3.1ic.=llnforrnatioiii;:Cfficer–Deputy Registrar of High Court of

e,_.A_.ppKarnataip{at,l for furnishing the certified copies of the

_llgfo1i’owing linfoijmation/documents as per the provisions of

1.] of the Right to Information Act, 2005 :

Guidelines, rules pertaining to scrutiny of

Writ Petition.

Guidelines, rules pertaining to classifica’tion_:u’ii”

of Writ Petition.

Guidelines, rules which pres:eribe’sA.’to lpostla

Writ Petition only on eaVrly.4_hear’i’11glapplicatiorla

Of 1T1€1’Il0.

Procedure, guidelines and rules._foll’owed when
the respondent has not. 7filed._ V G’ Written
statement as per l~Honourable

Number».oi”o::easi0.nsVtirnesreduests made by
Respond’en_ts_’for potstponirig the hearing and

the ifeas ons p’r.ojeeted”‘by them.

l\lumbet” of hearings’: held in Writ Petition

26é’57g2.o04.

“times the Writ Petition Number

” “?;’665″i’.1/f2.€V).’04 posted for hearing.

p Ofdets of Hon.Judge in all hearings of Writ
_ “Petition Number 26657/2004.

9.

10.

1}.

12.

13.

14.

Objections, Written submission, Written

statements filed by the respondents in W1-it

Petition Number 26657/2004.

Procedure, Guidelines, rules f0H0’\2iI€«’Z1,.”_:’:”j:1–i~,,/L.i

Writ Petition” ~ .. ‘Nu:-xiigsié. _

posting the
26657 / 2004,

Early hearing applicatio’n.;”‘=meInox_ gird.

other request made by… “advocaite…_,for§

petitioner
2665772004.

in Number
Number Petition
Number 1,f;*935;<2ooe;- .– " V
WritdWPetition Number
1 /2006 fie-sted. for beating.

_Ordersau’of:V1~Io.n.Judge: in ali hearings in Writ

“Petition Nuhm’oer…1<7935/2006.

Written submission, Written

W' fiied by the respondents in Writ

W is.

Z Hposting

“Procedure.

‘Petition Number 17935/2006.

Guidelines, rules followed in

the Writ Petition
1 7935 /2006.

Number

17. Early hearing application, memo and any

other request made by the advocate

petitioner in Writ Petition Numlger»

17935/2006.”

The Public information Officer

Annexure~’B’ dated 3rd August 2007, inforrning the,.’ifespondenti V

herein that the information sough’t:for by” the in
respect of the guidelines, rules of the
writ petition, guidelines and tovlclgassification of
the writ petition, the.lproce(§lure,’v’ rules followed
by the High has not filed his
statement, High Court Act and
Rules, 195fa:;’–._ relating to Sl.No.2, the
Public InforrnationOfficerV the respondent herein that
pgshoulgg lviciepositwnd to furnish the list regarding

cIass»ificatiVori_ of __writ petition. As regards information

relatiungfto’ request of the respondent was not

considered as the request was not specific. As regards S1.Nos.6

“the cohcerned officer informed the respondent herein

itoay obtain the certified copies of the order sheet

[pertaining to the Writ Petition No.2e657/2004 and Writ

-6-

Petition No.1’7935/2006 in accordance with the Rules. Being

aggrieved by the said order at Annexure~’B’, the

herein filed complaint under Section 18 (1) of the V’

Information Act, 2005 as per Ann.eX,ure–‘iCllmbelfoére” the

Karnataka Information Commission. Itwis i:’e1evant.to

the respondent did not challenge’flthe. order
Thus, the order Annexure–“B’ has finality,” However,

the respondent herein chose.”

to file under Section
18(1) of the Right toA,_Infor’;rv;f1_at–i:f.>.I? 2008,
contending therein?__’:th;;$t:i:. the information
is not furnishedlto lfees within the time
limit. The themstatement of objections
before the Kax*na’taha Cornmission. After hearing,
the impugned order._:ViAs’ -passedltas per Annexure–‘G’ to the writ
petition’xthelbetiltioner to furnish High Court Act 81

Rules ..or’dVei::sj’neet in two writ petitions free of cost to

Q A A A ..the complainant,’ ” ‘

information as sought for by the respondent in

«_lr’es;;ec’t._lof Item Nos}, 3 and 4 mentioned above are available in

High Court Act and Rules made thereunder. The

said Act and Rules are available in market. If not available,

the respondent has to obtain copies of the same fron1sflthle..

publishers. it is not open for the respondent to M

of the same from the petitioner. But st1iangely,_’the if

Information Commission has directed the petitioner”‘to’

the copies of the Karnataka High Court of
cost under Right to Information Aet4§>”v«_l’I’l1e order in

respect of the same is illegal: and

The information. in respectfpof’ to 17 is

relating to Writ N§i2i3«$57.g2eo4l:é’:{d Writ Petition

No.17935/2006, diswal party to the said
proceedings:V’.._A’Ihus,vlaccordiiigfltop: Rules of the High Court, it
IS open for the”‘respVonlde.nt_t’o:li’le an application for certified
copies of order-‘ A. or the relevant documents for
(‘See Chapter–17 of Karnataka High Court

Rules; open for the respondent to obtain

lvjrlcertified copies ‘ the order sheet pending as Well as the

” of matters, the State Chief Information Commissioner

is not justified in directing the petitioner to furnish copies of

free of costs. If the order of the State Chief

lk/9

_3,.

Information Commissioner is to be implemented, then, it-..fwill

lead to illegal demands. Under the Rules, any persoIitW”ho.,:is..

party or not a party to the proceedings, can obtain it

the High Court as per the procedure it

mentioned supra. The State Chief Inf’or1n:a’tio’n eon:mis4s15_11ef’eiii

has passed the order Without app-lying his ‘mind to’,the._:re-levant

Rules of the High Court. Chiefllnfovrlmation
Commissioner should have Court Rules
before proceeding further. ‘order is illegal
and arbitrary, the ;’safae’is.lia’o?le”.”totbevvdiiasned. Accordingly,
the following order :» ‘C it C

The impu’=gned”l54.5.2OO8 vide Ar1nexure–‘G’
passed by the Karnatal§a’lnfo’rrr:;ation Commission, is quashed.

Writ petiti is . allotlied ,ae_e_oi”dingly.

sd/-

woes: