[Cites 11, Cited by 0]
Telangana High Court
Humayun Hyder Abbas vs The Secretary To Government Chief ... on 7 April, 2026
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI
WRIT PETITION No.10206 OF 2026
DATE OF ORDER : 07.04.2026
Between:
Humayun Hyder Abbas, S/o. Humayun
Hasan Abba, Age 47 years, Occ: Business,
R/o. H.No.22-3-82/A, Mata Khidki, Hyderabad
.. Petitioner
And
The State to Government, Chief Secretary
CS General Admn Depart of GAD,
Dr.B.R. Ambedkar, Telangana Secretariat,
Hyderabad and four (4) others
.. Respondents
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed with the following prayer:
"... to issue an appropriate writ order or direction
more particularly one in the nature of Writ of
Mandamus by declaring the inaction of the
Respondents No.2 to 4 in not providing sought
information sufficient information to the RTI
Petitioner in regard to RTI application U/Sec.6(1)
filed before the respondent No.4 dated 24.09.2025,
22.08.2024 the RTI First Appeal U/Sec.19(1) filed
before the Respondent No.3 dated 03.12.2025 and
the RTI Second Appeal U/Sec.19(3) filed before the
State Information Commission at Hyderabad dated
19.01.2026 as illegal, unjust, unreasonable,
arbitrary against to the provisions of RTI Act, 2005
against to the rights guaranteed by the Constitution
of India and against to principles of natural justice
and violation of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of
Constitution of India, pending disposal of the writ
petition and pass such other order or orders as this
Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case ... "
2. Heard Mr. M.A. Quadeer, learned counsel for
petitioner, learned Government Pleader for GAD for
respondent Nos.1 and 2, learned Government Pleader
for Land Acquisition for respondent No.3 and there is no
representation for learned Government Pleader for Tourism
for respondent Nos.4 and 5.
3. Case of petitioner is that he filed an application dated
24.09.2025 under Section 6 of the Right to Information Act,
2005 (for short, 'the Act, 2005') (Ex.P1 at page No.13 of the
writ papers) before the Public Information Officer (PIO) -
respondent No.5 seeking the following particulars:
"1. How much extent of land is acquired for
Metro Rail in respect of the houses bearing
Municipal Nos.22-2-673 to 676, 22-2-677 to
680 and 22-2-680/1 situated at Darulshifa,
Hyderabad, Telangana. And how much
extent of land is left after acquisition.
2. How much compensation has been released
by your authority to the owners of the
subjected properties.
3. How many owners of the subjected properties
have received the compensation and mention
the owners names.
4. Furnish the property documents on which
basis your authority has been released the
compensation to the owners of the subjected
properties."
4. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the PIO
by his order dated 11.10.2025 held as follows:
"... With reference to the letter cited, you are
hereby informed that the information sought
cannot be furnished under section 8(1)(j) of RTI
Act, 2005."
5. Aggrieved by the order passed by PIO, dated
11.10.2025, petitioner filed First Appeal dated 03.12.2025
(Exs.P3 and P4 at page Nos.15 and 16 of the writ papers)
under Section 19 (1) of the Act, 2005 before the First
Appellate Authority - respondent No.4 seeking to provide
the information sought by him. But petitioner alleges he
was not provided information as sought by him. The first
appellate authority through letter dated 08.01.2026
(Ex.P6 at page No.18 of the writ papers) informed the
petitioner that the information sought by petitioner could
not be furnished. The contents of the letter dated
08.01.2026 are as follows:
"... With reference to the letter cited, you are
hereby informed that the information sought
cannot be furnished under section 8(1)(j) of RTI
Act, 2005."
6. Aggrieved by the order, dated 08.01.2026, petitioner
filed Second Appeal (Ex.P7 at page No.19 of the writ papers)
on 19.01.2026 under Section 19(3) of the Act, 2005 before
the Telangana Information Commissioner, Hyderabad,
seeking to provide the required information. It is pointed out
that the said application is pending before the Second
Appellate Authority and no orders are passed.
7. Heard learned counsels, perused the record and
considered the submissions.
8. Perused the record, the application and First Appeal
and Second Appeal filed by petitioner. The authorities
concerned refused to give information sought by petitioner
citing Section 8(1)(j) of the Act, 2005. Section 8(1)(j) of the
Act is as follows:
"Section 8. Exemption from disclosure of
information.--(1) Notwithstanding anything
contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation
to give any citizen,--
... ...
(j) information which relates to personal
information the disclosure of which has no
relationship to any public activity or interest, or
which would cause unwarranted invasion of the
privacy of the individual unless the Central Public
Information Officer or the State Public Information
Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may
be, is satisfied that the larger public interest
justifies the disclosure of such information"
9. It is trite to note that the Act, 2005 provides remedy of
appeal under Section 19 of the Act, 2005 to the Central or
State Information Commission. In the present case, the
appropriate remedy for the petitioner would be to file an
application before the State Information Commission.
10. Second Appeal dated 19.01.2026 filed by petitioner is
pending before the Telangana Information Commissioner,
(Ex.P7 at page No.19 of the writ papers) and seal of
Telangana Information Commission, dated 19.01.2026, is
also visible on the Second Appeal.
11. If orders are passed in the Second Appeal dated
19.01.2026 filed by petitioner before the Commissioner,
Telangana Information Commission, Hyderabad, petitioner
is granted liberty to challenge the said orders and if no
orders are passed in the Second Appeal, orders be passed
as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of
four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order.
12. With the above observations, the writ petition is
disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand
closed.
___________________________
ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J
Date:07.04.2026
KH
