Madras High Court
New Tirupur Area Development ... vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 19 July, 2021
W.A.No.2037/2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.07.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
W.A.No.2037 of 2010 and M.P.No.1/2010
New Tirupur Area Development Corporation
Limited rep. by its Authorized Signatory,
''Anurag'' No.15, Murray's Gate Road,
Alwarpet, Chennai-600 018. ... Appellant
-vs-
1. State of Tamil Nadu
rep. by its Secretary,
Personnel and Administrative
Reforms AR III Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009.
2. State Information Commission,
Kamadenu Supermarket,
1st Floor, No.273, New No.378,
Anna Salai, Teynampet,
Chennai-600 018.
3. The Chief Information Commissioner,
Kamadenu Supermarket,
1st Floor, No.273, New No.378,
Anna Salai, Teynampet,
Chennai-600 018.
4. Rahmat
5. Gaurav Dwivedi ... Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
W.A.No.2037/2010
Prayer: Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent
against the order dated 06.04.2010 made in W.P.No.9794/2008 by a
learned Single Judge of this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.P.Giridharan
For respondents : Mr.T.Arun Kumar,
Govt. Advocate for R1
Mr.Niranjan Rajagopal
for M/s.G.R.Associates
for R2 and R3
Mr.P.V.Ravichandran
for R4 and R5
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was pronounced by T.RAJA.J)
This Writ Appeal has been directed against the order dated
06.04.2010 made in W.P.No.9794/2008 in and by which the learned
Single Judge of this Court dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the New
Tirupur Area Development Corporation Limited, the appellant herein
thereby holding that the appellant is the Public Authority as defined
under Section 2 (h)(d) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 by the
State Information Commission, the 2nd respondent herein.
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant.
3. Learned Counsel for the respondents 2 and 3 submitted that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.2037/2010
after the dismissal of the Writ Petition filed by the appellant herein in
W.P.No.9794/2008 thereby confirming the order passed by the State
Information Commission, Chennai, the 2nd respondent herein dated
24.03.2008 bearing No.31422/Enquiry/2006 holding that the appellant
is a ''public authority'' as defined under Section 2(h) (d) of the Right to
Information Act with a direction to supply the information sought for
by the respondents 4 and 5 within 15 days, much more developments
and changes have taken place. During the pendency of this appeal,
three important decisions of Our High Court in The Public
Information Officer and Others vs. The Registrar, Tamil Nadu
Information Commission and others reported in AIR 2015
Madras 169, yet another decision of High Court of Delhi in Indian
Potash Limited and others vs. Union of India and others
reported in 2018 IIAD (Delhi) 552 and one more decision of Kerala
High Court in Cochin International Airport Limited vs. State
Information Commissioner and another reported in ILR 2019 (2)
Kerala 624 have defined what is ''public authority''.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.2037/2010
4. Since all these judgments have clearly defined what is
''public authority'' so as to bring the public authority under the ambit
of Section 2(h)(d) of the Right to Information Act, finding that the
learned State Information Commissioner to consider these parametres
indicated in the aforementioned judgments, we deem it fit to remand
the matter back to the State Information Commissioner, the 2 nd
respondent herein to re-do the matter afresh and pass appropriate
orders in accordance with law and also taking into account the three
important decisions of Our High Court in The Public Information
Officer and Others vs. The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Information
Commission and others reported in AIR 2015 Madras 169, yet
another decision of High Court of Delhi in Indian Potash Limited
and others vs. Union of India and others reported in 2018 IIAD
(Delhi) 552 and one another decision of Kerala High Court in Cochin
International Airport Limited vs. State Information
Commissioner and another reported in ILR 2019 (2) Kerala 624.
5. With the above observation and direction, the impugned
order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.9794/2008
thereby confirming the order passed by the State Information
Commission, Chennai, the 2nd respondent herein dated 24.03.2008
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.2037/2010
bearing No.31422/Enquiry/2006 is set aside. No costs. Consequently,
connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
(T.R.J.,) (V.S.G.J.,)
19.07.2021
tsi
To
1. The Secretary,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Personnel and Administrative
Reforms AR III Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009.
2. State Information Commission,
Kamadenu Supermarket,
1st Floor, No.273, New No.378,
Anna Salai, Teynampet,
Chennai-600 018.
3. The Chief Information Commissioner,
Kamadenu Supermarket,
1st Floor, No.273, New No.378,
Anna Salai, Teynampet,
Chennai-600 018.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.2037/2010
T.RAJA, J.
and
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
tsi
W.A.No.2037/2010
19.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
