Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 87054 (KAR)

SRI SATISH R v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/20996/2022 · 2025-12-15

E S Indiresh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53349 WP No. 20996 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 20996 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. SATISH R AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, SON OF LATE RUDRAIAH, RESIDING AT HONASIGERE VILLAGE, HEBBUR HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK, TUMAKUR DISTRICT - 572 122. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. FAYAZ SAB B.G, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION, M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER MAHITHI SOUDHA, DEVARAJA URASU ROAD, VIDHANA SOUDHA, OPPOSITE TO EAST ENTRANCE-2, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER TUMAKURU JILLA PANCHAYATH, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 101. Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53349 WP No. 20996 of 2022 4. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TUMAKURU TALUK PANCHAYATH, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 101. 5. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER HONASIGERE GRAMA PANCHAYATH, HONASIGERE, HEBBUR HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 122. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. J.N. NAVEEN, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R5; SRI. RAJSHEKAR K, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER.QUASH AN IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED IN RTI APPEAL IN NO. KA MA AA/218/COM/2021 ON 01.06.2022 PASSED BY THE R-2 WHEREIN CLOSED THE APPEAL WITHOUT COLLECTING, VERIFYING AND SCRUTINIZING THE DOCUMENTS OF THE FALSE ORAL STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE R-5 THAT THE CASE IS PENDING IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AND BEFORE THE R-4 AND HENCE THE INFORMATION SOUGHT BY THE PETITIONER UNDER RTI ACT IS NOT MAINTAINED IN THE R-5 OFFICE. EVEN THOUGH NO SUCH CASE ARE PENDING BEFORE ANY COURT OR AUTHORITY, AND THOSE CASES ARE NO WAY CONCERNED TO THE INFORMATION SOUGHT BY THE PETITIONER UNDER THE RTI ACT, VIDE ANNX-T, AS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, CAPRICIOUS, MALAFIDE, WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND AND OPPOSED TO THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53349 WP No. 20996 of 2022 ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. In this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the order dated 01.06.2022 (Annexure-T) passed by respondent No.2. 3. Having taken note of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and the impugned order at Annexure-T wherein, the petitioner is required to make an application to the competent authority under Section 6(1) and 7(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 as to the requirement of the documents in respect of the subject matter. If such an application is made by the petitioner herein, in terms, as per the format produced at Annexure-P to the writ petition, to the competent authority, same shall be considered by the respondents in accordance with law. With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39