A single judge bench of the Justice Biren Vaishnav of Gujarat HC has dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner for asking true copies of the documents. It was observed by the court that the copies are already supplied to the petitioner and copy of the same is annexed here in.
Facts:
The prayer in the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to direct the respondent no.2 to provide true information as per the order dated 05.10.2016 passed by the Chief Information Commissioner, Gujarat State Information Commission. The facts in brief indicates that it is the case of the petitioner that he is an agricultural labourer and without seeking appropriate permission of the petitioner, a road has been constructed on a private land situated at Village:Juna Laxmipura. Invoking the Right to Information Act, 2005, the petitioner filed an application in the prescribed format seeking certain information with regard to the construction and the permissions, if any, pursuant to which such construction was made.
The Public Information Officer on 15.12.2014 informed the petitioner that pursuant to the applications made earlier in point of time, the maps, plan, estimates etc. were supplied to the petitioner on 12.11.2013. Copy of the permission too was supplied and therefore there was no further clarification that was necessary to be provided.
Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that despite an order passed by the Information Commission, true and correct information has not been provided to the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2-Public Information Officer and the Deputy Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings Sub Division (Panchayat), Palanpur, District:Banaskantha, submitted that pursuant to the application made, information was provided to him and in para 4 of the reply, it is specifically stated.
Observations of the Court:
The court after hearing the arguments denied exercising its discretionary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as they do not find any merit to step into the shoes of the Information Commissioner and do what has been directed by the Commissioner. They find out that reading the order indicates that the Public Information Officer – respondent no.2 has been directed to supply and provide information and copies of the relevant files or notings and reading para 4 of the affidavit in reply which is quoted herein above, indicates that the petitioner was permitted to inspect all the available records and all information as directed, has been forwarded to the petitioner by a letter dated 10.11.2016.
Copies of these documents have been annexed to the petition which indicate that the documents which provided the source of funds from which the road has been built, papers of technical sanction and the estimates thereof which are documents and the file notings have been provided to the petitioner.
Decision:
The writ petition was dismissed as there is no reason why further discretion in favour of the petitioner is needed when the impugned order already directed to provide him all copies and respondents have provided the same.
Case: RAMESHBHAI MANJIBHAI PATEL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 3 other(s)
Citation: R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 661 of 2017
Coram: Justice Biren Vaishnav
Dated: 08.11.2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com:
Picture Source :
