- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39762 WP NO.15117 OF 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.15117 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: PRASAD S/O LATE S. NAGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, #1230/CH 36, 2ND CROSS, KRISHNAMURTHYPURAM, MYSURU - 570 024. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AKSHAY S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SRINIVAS D.C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSIONER "MAHITHI SOUDHA", ROOM NO.103, 1ST FLOOR, OPP: VIDHANASOUDHA WEST GATE-2, D. DEVARAJ URS ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE COMMISSIONER MYSURU MAHANGARA PALIKE, SAYYAJI RAO ROAD, MYSURU - 570 001. 3. THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER AND ZONAL COMMISSIONER, ZONE-2,MYSURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, JAYANAGARA GATE, KRISHNAMURTHYPURAM, MYSURU - 570 024. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.B. SHARATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SMT. GEETHA DEVI M.P., ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39762 WP NO.15117 OF 2019 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET- ASIDE THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 28TH NOVEMBER, 2018 ISSUED BY THE KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSION I.E., THE RESPONDENT NO.1 VIDE ANNEXURE-A; SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 06TH JULY, 2018 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN KIC 601 APL 2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-F; AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the endorsement dated 28th November, 2018 (Annexure-A) issued by the respondent No.1 and order dated 06th July, 2018 (Annexure-F) passed by the respondent No.1; inter alia sought for direction to the respondents 2 and 3 to issue information as requested by the petitioner. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is a citizen of India, seeking information with regard to inspection conducted by the respondent- Authorities in respect of the property bearing No.1230/CH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39762 WP NO.15117 OF 2019 36C, 2nd Cross, K.M. Puram, Musuru as per Annexure-C to the writ petition. The respondent No.3, by endorsement dated 15th May, 2017 (Annexure-D), rejected the application on the ground that the information sought for by the petitioner cannot be disclosed under Section 2(f) of Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'RTI-Act'). Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred the appeal before the respondent No.2, which came to be dismissed by order dated 15th September, 2017. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the respondent No.1 in case No.KIC 601 APL 2018 and the respondent No.1, by order dated 06th July, 2018 (Annexure-F), closed the proceedings holding that the respondent-Authorities have already furnished the information to the petitioner. 3. Heard Sri. Akshay S., learned counsel on behalf of Sri. Srinivas D.C., appearing for the petitioner; Sri. G.B. Sharath Gowda, learned counsel appearing for the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39762 WP NO.15117 OF 2019 respondent No.1; and Smt. Geetha Devi M.P., learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3. 4. Sri. Akshay S., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the reason assigned by the respondent No.3 in endorsement dated 15th May, 2017 (Annexure-D) is incorrect as the petitioner has sought for information about the persons who have conducted the spot inspection with regard to the property in question referred to above. He further contended that the respondents be directed to provide information as sought for in the Form-A appended to the Annexure-E. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court. 5. Per contra, Smt. Geetha Devi M.P., learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 invited the attention of the Court to the Section 2(f) of the RTI-Act and submitted that the information sought for by the petitioner cannot be issued as per Section 2(f) of the RTI- Act. Accordingly, she sought for dismissal of the writ petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39762 WP NO.15117 OF 2019 6. In the light for submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the writ papers, the same would indicate that the petitioner is claiming information about the persons who had conducted survey/spot inspection in respect of the property in question referred to above. Undisputedly, nothing is stated in the writ petition as to who is the owner of the property in question and therefore, it may be concluded that the petitioner is not a owner of the property in question and in the backdrop of these aspects, I have gone through the language employed under Section 2(f) of the RTI-Act, which reads as under: "2(f). "information" means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advises, press releases, circulars, orders, log books, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any law for the time being in force." 7. On perusal of the definition of the 'information' in the RTI-Act, I have carefully examined the Column No.3 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39762 WP NO.15117 OF 2019 in Form-A appended to the Annexure-E, wherein the petitioner has sought for information of persons who conducted the survey/spot inspection of the property in question. In that view of the matter, the said information does not find place under Section 2(f) of the RTI-Act and as such, the respondents were justified in issuing the impugned endorsement/order to the petitioner. Therefore, I am of the view that, no interference be called for in the present petition. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed. SD/- (E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45