In the Central Information Commission at New Delhi File No: CIC/SM/A/2011/00093AD Date of Hearing : July 13, 2011 Date of Decision : July 13, 2011 Parties: Appellant Shri B. Raman 4/104, Sackatha, Aravenu Post 643 201, Kotagiri Taluk, The Nilgiris District, Tamil Nadu The Appellant was not present. Respondents Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, #108, Lawyers Chamer, R.K. Jain Chamber Block, PO Wing, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi Represented by: Shri P.K. Bajaj, Secretary, Shri T.K. Barua, Superintendent and Shri R.D. Sharma, Assistant to CPIO. Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit ___________________________________________________________________ In the Central Information Commission at New Delhi File No: CIC/SM/A/2011/00093AD ORDER
Background
1. The Applicant, through his RTIapplication dated 11.06.2010, filed with the CPIO, Supreme Court of
India, New Delhi, wanted to obtain certain advice from the legal services authority in respect of
certain immovable properties, which according to him, belonged to one Late Bella Gowder S/o Nanja
Gowder at Kotagiri Village in the Nilgiris District Tamil Nadu, and was mortgaged by Shri Indra Kumar
S/o late Shri Ramamswamy–the younger son of Late Shri Bella Gowder–for performing the
marriage ceremonies of his 4 sisters as also for offering the dowries. It was his case that now the
sisters of Shri Indra Kumar, after several years of their marriage, have claimed their shares in the
above family property of Shri Indra Kumar and have also attempted to take legal action for partition
and possession of said property. The Applicant’s RTIquery reads as follows:
“….whether the sister of Indra Kumar can claim their shares after a long lapse and after their
marriages and whether the case is not barred by limitation. It may also be stated whether they are
entitled to any shares in the ancestral property inherited by Indra Kumar who has already spent a
considerable amount towards the marriage of his sisters and the dowry offered to them.”
2. The PIO, Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, to whom the above RTIapplication was
transferred by the CPIO, Supreme Court, on 21.062010, informed the Applicant that he is seeking
advice/opinion of the PIO in respect of certain grievance which cannot be given under the RTIAct.
He, however, advised the Applicant to approach the appropriate forum for rerdressal of his grievance.
The Appellate Authority, on 29.09.2010, in response to the Appellant’s 1stappeal, endorsed the PIO’s
view. The Appellant, thereafter, filed the present petition before the Commission on 26.10.2010
stating that the Appellate Authority, rather than dismissing his 1stappeal to him, could very well have
informed him about the forum to be approached by him for seeking such advice or could have
transferred his request to that forum. He accordingly sought necessary direction in the matter.
Decision
2. It is undisputable that what the Appellant is seeking herein is a ‘legal advice’ and that he has not
solicited any material information available in Respondents’ record as defined under Section 2(f) read
with Section 2(j) of the RTIAct.
3. In view of the above, no disclosure obligation can be cast on the Respondents with respect to the
present RTIapplication. The appeal is, therefore, rejected. Nevertheless, considering the Appellant’s
request in the present appeal that he may be informed about the appropriate forum for seeking help
in the matter, the representatives of the Respondents, on being asked by the Commission, have
mentioned that the Appellant may approach the District Legal Services Committee, under the
provisions of Legal Services Authority Act, 1987.
4. The appeal is disposed of accordingly and the case closed.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri B. Raman
4/104, Sackatha,
Aravenu Post 643 201,
Kotagiri Taluk,
The Nilgiris District,
Tamil Nadu
2. The Appellate Authority
Supreme Court Legal Services Committee,
#108, Lawyers Chamer,
R.K. Jain Chamber Block, PO Wing,
Supreme Court Compound,
New Delhi
3. The Public Information Officer
Supreme Court Legal Services Committee,
#108, Lawyers Chamer,
R.K. Jain Chamber Block, PO Wing,
Supreme Court Compound,
New Delhi
4. Officer in charge, NIC