Page No. 1/4 GAHC010011262025 2025:GAU-AS:768 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/328/2025 MALBAR HUSSAIN S/O LT. HASHEM ALI, VILL- GUTIPARA PART-III, P.O.-GUTIPARA, P.S.- BILASIPARA, DIST-DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN-783349. P/R/A HOUSE NO. 4, DHATALPARA MILAN NAGAR PATH, P.O AND P.S.-FATASHIL AMBARI, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, GUWAHATI-781025 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATIONS DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06 2:THE CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSION OFFICE OF THE ASSAM STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION GADAPANI PATH JURIPAR PANJABARI GUWAHATI-37 3:THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER (SPIO) O/O THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS DDC DHUBRI P.O. AND P.S.-DHUBRI DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783301 4:THE HEAD MASTER DHALAPARA PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL P.O.-GUTIPARA P.S.-BILASIPARA DIST- DHUBRI Page No. 2/4 ASSAM PIN-78334 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A MOBARAQUE, MR A.K. MOLLAH,MR. R I MONDAL Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 24.01.2025 Heard Mr. A. Mobaraque, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. M. Barman, learned Juniior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 1, 3 & 4; and Mr. D. Deka, learned Standing Counsel, Assam Information Commission for the respondent no. 2. 2. The petitioner in order to obtain certain information, stated to have submitted an application before the State Public Information Officer [SPIO], O/O the Inspector of Schools, DDC, on 12.05.2023 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 [‘the RTI Act’]. The petitioner has projected that as the SPIO did not furnish the information, as sought for under the Right to Information Act, 2005, within the prescribed time period, the petitioner having no alternative, had preferred a 1st appeal under Section 19 [1] of the RTI Act before the 1st Appellate Authority. On receipt of the 1st appeal, the 1st Appellate Authority, by a Communication dated 16.06.2023, directed the SPIO to furnish the documents / information, as sought for by the petitioner. Despite such Communication dated 16.06.2023, the SPIO did not furnish the documents / information to the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred a 2nd appeal under Section 19 [3] of the RTI Act before the State Information Commission on 14.09.2023. On receipt of the appeal, the same was registered and numbered as Case no. 391338/[KPM]/225/2023. After conducting a hearing, the State Information Commission, by its Order dated 14.05.2024, had directed the SPIO to furnish the documents / information to the petitioner within a stipulated time period, mentioned therein. As the SPIO, despite the Order dated 14.05.2024, has not furnished the information till date, the petitioner has approached this Court by the instant writ petition. 3. Mr. Deka, learned Standing Counsel, Assam Information Commission appearing for the Page No. 3/4 respondent no. 2 has submitted that the petitioner without approaching the State Information Commission first, has approached this Court by the instant writ petition. 4. Section 18 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 reads as under :- 18. Powers and functions of Information Commission.-[1] Subject to the provisions of this Act, it shall be the duty of the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission as the case may be to receive and inquire into a complaint from any person,- [a] who has been unable to submit a request to a Central Public Information Officer, or State Public Information Officer as the case may be, either by reason that no such officer has been appointed under this Act, or because the Central Assistant Public Information Officer or State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has refused to accept his or her application for information or appeal under this Act for forwarding the same to the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer or Senior Officer specified in sub-section [1] of section 19 or the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be; [b] who has been refused access to any information requested under this Act; [c] who has not been given a response to a request for information or access to information within the time limits specified under this Act; [d] who has been required to pay an amount of fee which he or she considers unreasonable; [e] who believes that he or she has been given incomplete, misleading or false information under this Act; and [f] in respect of any other matter relating to requesting or obtaining access to records under this Act. [2] Where the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to inquire into the matter, it may initiate an inquiry in respect thereof. [3] The Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the Page No. 4/4 case may be shall, while inquiring into any matter under this section, have the same powers as are vested in a civil court while trying a suit under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, in respect of the following matters, namely:- [a] summoning and enforcing the attendance of persons and compel them to give oral or written evidence on oath and to produce the documents or things; [b] requiring the discovery and inspection of documents; [c] receiving evidence on affidavit; [d] requisitioning any public record or copies thereof from any court or office; [e] issuing summons for examination of witnesses or documents; and [f] any other matter which may be prescribed. [4] Notwithstanding anything inconsistent contained in any other Act of Parliament, or the State Legislature, as the case may be, the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may, during the inquiry of any complaint under this Act, examine any record to which this Act applies which is under the control of the public authority, and no such record may be withheld from it on any grounds." 5. Taking into consideration the fact that an Order was passed by the State Information Commission, already on 14.05.2024, thereby, disposing of the 2nd appeal and the direction passed therein has not been complied with, till date, the petitioner would be at liberty to make a complaint to the State Information Commission according to provisions of Section 18 [1] of the RTI Act. If the petitioner makes a complaint before the authority under the provisions of Section 18 [1], the Commission may take cognizance of such complaint. Thus, in the opinion of this Court, the present petition is not to be entertained at this stage in view of the availability of such adequate statutory remedy under Section 18 [1] of the RTI Act and the same is hereby disposed of with an observation that the petitioner would be at liberty to take recourse of law, as provided under the RTI Act. JUDGE Comparing Assistant