Lt. Col Naveen Kumar Anand (Retd.) vs Union Of India & Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 2348 Del

$~2
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                               Judgment delivered on: 11.05.2017

+        W.P.(C) 3706/2017
LT. COL NAVEEN KUMAR ANAND (RETD.)                          ..... Petitioner
                             versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS                                    ..... Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioner :         Petitioner in person.

For the Respondent :         None.


CORAM:-

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                                JUDGMENT

11.05.2017

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner, by the present petition, seeks a direction to the respondents to provide information sought for by the petitioner by an application dated 10.02.2017.

2. The petitioner, on 10.02.2017, filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) with the Directorate General (Resettlement).

3. It is noticed that the said application was sent by post to

respondent No.2. Within a period of 33 days, the petitioner filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority on 15.03.2017.

4. Contending that the appeal of the petitioner has not been decided by the First Appellate Authority, the petitioner has filed the present petition on 24.04.2017 i.e. within a period of 46 days of filing the first appeal before the First Appellate Authority.

5. Without giving a reasonable time to the authorities to act and without filing an appeal before the Central Information Commission (CIC) or an application under section 20 of the Act before the CIC, the petitioner has filed this Petition.

6. The petitioner seems to be acting in haste in not giving the authorities sufficient time to even respond to his application or decide his first appeal.

7. In my view, the present petition is premature and in the facts not maintainable. The petitioner would have to await the decision of the First Appellate Authority and, thereafter, take remedies under the Act before the CIC. At this juncture, I am not inclined to exercise powers under Article 226 and entertain this petition.

8. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J MAY 11, 2017 st