- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41089 WP No. 31512 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.31512 OF 2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. M. P. MANJUNATH S/O. LATE PUTTASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC-ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, R/O.68, 3RD MAIN ROAD, NAGENDRA BLOCK, BSK 1ST STAGE, BENGALURU-560 050. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DEVI PRASAD SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSIONER NO.103, 1ST FLOOR, MAHITHI SOWDHA, DEVRAJ URS ROAD, OPPOSITE TO VIDHANA SOUDHA, WEST GATE-2, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (ICDP) FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, OFFICE OF REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41089 WP No. 31512 of 2017 SOCIEITES, NO.1, ALI ASKER ROAD, BENGALURU-560 052. 3. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND PUBLIC RELATION OFFICER, OFFICE OF REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, NO.1, ALI ASKER ROAD, BENGALURU-560 052. 4. K. MALLIKARJUNA RAJU S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, KARNATAKA KARMIKA KALYANA PRATISHTANA, NO.859, 1ST FLOOR, 1ST MAIN ROAD, YESHWANTHPUR, BENGALURU-560 022. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R2 & R3; SRI. RAJASHEKAR K., ADVOCATE FOR R1; R4 SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 31.05.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-Q PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 IN KAMAAA14300 APPELLANT 2015. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41089 WP No. 31512 of 2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER In this writ petition the petitioner is assailing the order dated 31.05.2017 (Annexure-Q) passed by the respondent No.1. 2. Relevant facts for adjudication of this writ petition are that the respondent No.4, who claims to be the social worker, has made application to the respondent No.3, seeking certain documents under Section 6(1) of Right to Information Act, 2005, (hereinafter referred to as Act) as per Annexure-A. Pursuant to the same, the respondent No.3, has addressed letter dated 28.09.2015 (Annexure-B) to the PIO (Public Relation/Information Officer) of the Department of Registration and Stamp, to consider the application made by the respondent No.4 as per Annexure-A. In the meanwhile the respondent No.4 has filed first appeal before the respondent No.2, and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41089 WP No. 31512 of 2017 in the said proceedings as per Annexure-E, dated 07.12.2015, the First Appellate authority dismissed the appeal as the Department of Stamp and Revenue has to provide the information sought for by the respondent 4. Despite the same, respondent No.4 has preferred, second appeal, before respondent No.1, and in the said proceedings at Annexure-Q, the respondent No.1 by its order dated 31.05.2017, penalized the petitioner for not furnishing the relevant documents to the respondent No.4 and imposed cost of Rs.10,000/- and being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order at Annexure-Q, passed by respondent No.1. 3. I have heard Sri. Devi Prasad Shetty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Mahantesh Shettar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing or the respondent-State and Sri. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41089 WP No. 31512 of 2017 Rajashekar K., learned counsel for the respondent No.1. 4. Sri. Devi Prasad Shetty, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that, the application made by the respondent No.4 was forwarded to the Department Registration and Stamp to furnish the documents as per Annexure-B and the petitioner herein was working in the Branch of Money Lending and Chits and was not PIO of the respondent No.3 office to furnish the details as per Annexure-A, and therefore, the impugned order at Annexure- Q requires to be interfered with in this petition. 5. Per contra, Sri. Rajashekar K., learned counsel for the respondent No.1 sought to justify the impugned order at Annexure-Q passed by respondent No.1. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41089 WP No. 31512 of 2017 6. In the light of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that the respondent No.4 has sought for certain documents as per Annexure-A and respondent No.3, by letter dated 28.09.2015 (Annexure-B) forwarded the said application made by the respondent No.4 to the PIO of Department Stamp and Registration. In that view of the matter, the respondent No.4, ought to have approached the Department of Stamp and Registration instead of preferring First Appeal before respondent No.3 and ultimately, the matter has reached respondent No.1, in which the respondent No.1, without considering the fact that, the petitioner herein was working in the branch of Money Lending and Chits in the office of Registrar of Co-operative Societies and not connected to furnish the documents to respondent No.4 as Public Relation/Information Officer, has imposed the cost of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41089 WP No. 31512 of 2017 Rs.10,000/- which requires to be set aside in this writ petition on the sole ground that the respondent No.1 has not properly appreciated the fact that the petitioner herein was not working at PIO of Department of the Stamp and Registration-respondent No.3 office. Hence, the writ petition is allowed. Order dated 31.05.2017 (Annexure-Q) passed by the respondent No.1 herein is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted to respondent No.1 to consider the case afresh after affording opportunity of hearing all the parties concerned, excluding the petitioner herein and take decision in the matter in accordance with law. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB:List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27