Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 15135 Mad
Judgement Date : 9 September, 2022
W.P(MD)No.10112 of 2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 09.09.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.P(MD)No.9323 of 2013
and
M.P(MD).No.1 of 2013
1.The Public Information Officer,
Thoothukudi City Municipal Corporation,
Thoothukudi.
2.The Commissioner,
Thoothukudi City Municipal Corporation,
Thoothukudi. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Thulasimani Marbalagan
2.The President,
District Consumer Redressal Forum,
Tuticorin. ... Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the
impugned records on the file of the second respondent in C.C.No.117 of
2011 dated 17.05.2012 and to quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Anandakumar
For Respondents : No Appearance
1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.10112 of 2013
ORDER
The present petition has been filed challenging an award
passed by the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Tuticorin. The
petitioner is a Public Information Officer of Tuticorin City Municipal
Corporation. In the present writ petition, the award passed by the District
Consumer Redressal Forum as against a Public Information Officer is
under challenge.
2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner relied upon a judgment
rendered by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
reported in 2015 SCC OnLine NCDRC 2. In Paragraph No.25 of the
said judgment, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Commission has held as follows:
“25.For the reasons stated hereinabove, we hold that
(i) the person seeking information under the provisions of RTI Act cannot be said to be a consumer vis-a-vis the Public Authority concerned or CPIO/PIO nominated by it and (ii) the jurisdiction of the Consumer Fora to intervene in the matters arising out of the provisions of the RTI Act is barred by necessary implication as also under the provisions of Section 23 of the said Act. Consequently no complaint by a person alleging deficiency in the services rendered by the CPIO/PIO
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.10112 of 2013
is maintainable before a Consumer Forum.”
3. In view of the aforesaid judgment, a District Consumer
Redressal Forum has no jurisdiction, whatsoever to entertain a consumer
complaint as against the Public Information Officer. However, without
jurisdiction, District Consumer Redressal Forum has accepted the
complaint and passed an award on 17.05.2012. The award is without
jurisdiction.
4. Hence, the impugned award is set aside. This writ petition is
allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is
closed.
09.09.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
vsg
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.10112 of 2013
R.VIJAYAKUMAR ,J.
vsg
Order made in W.P(MD)No.9323 of 2013
Dated:
09.09.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!