Gujarat High Court
Balubha Pabubha Ker vs State Information Commissioner, ... on 17 June, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/3191/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 3191 of
2025
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 739 of 2025
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 739 of 2025
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 879 of 2025
==========================================================
BALUBHA PABUBHA KER
Versus
STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER, GUJARAT INFORMATION
COMMISSION & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. TRUSHA PATEL, SENIOR ADVOCATE with NISHITH P
ACHARYA(9308) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. DEVANG VYAS, SENIOR ADVOCATE with MS DHARMISHTA
RAVAL(707) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
SHIVANG M. SHAH for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY
Date : 17/06/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA
AGARWAL)
ORDER IN R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR
CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 3191 of 2025
There is no objection to the delay in filing the instant
appeal by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondents. The delay in filing the appeal has been explained
to the satisfaction of the Court. The Delay Condonation
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/3191/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025
undefined
Application is hereby allowed. The delay in filing the appeal is
condoned. The Registry is directed to give the regular number
to the Letters Patent Appeal.
ORDER IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL:-
1. This is a wholly misconceived appeal filed against the
judgment and order dated 31.01.2025 passed by the
learned Single Judge in dismissing the writ petition
challenging the order dated 10.10.2024 passed by the
Appellate Authority under the Right to Information Act,
2005. It is categorically recorded by the learned Single
Judge that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative
remedy of filing an appeal under Section 19 (3) of the Right
Information Act before the State Information Commission.
The contention of learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
appellant is that the principles of natural justice have been
violated while passing the order dated 10.10.2024, and
hence, this case would fall within the meaning of the
exceptions carved out by the Courts for entertaining a writ
petition even ignoring the availability of a statutory
remedy.
2. We are of the view that such contentions are to be rejected
outrightly for the simple reason that the question of
whether the information provided to the petitioner was
incomplete or the petitioner was not heard on the issue
that he was entitled for release of the information on the
RTI Application, are the questions to be decided by the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/3191/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/06/2025
undefined
State Information Commission within the scope of the Right
to Information Act, 2005. The Right to Information Act is a
special statute which has been enacted to promote
transparency and accountability in the working of every
public authority. There are exceptions under the statutory
provisions for providing information under the Right to
Information Act. The procedure prescribed under the Act is
to be followed strictly. Any violation of a statutory provision
can very well be looked into by the reviewing authority
constituted under the Act, such as the State Information
Commission or Central Information Commission, as the
case may be.
3. We do not find any error in the decision of the learned
Single Judge. The appeal stands dismissed, accordingly.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(D.N.RAY,J)
VARSHA DESAI
