- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28133 WP No. 9460 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 9460 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. MATHEW THOMAS MANAGING TRUSTEE, THE FIFTH ESTATE TRUST AGED 86 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.02, 'ARISTOS', 'SOBHA CITY', THANISANDRA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 077 … PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANN MARY TOMY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI NITIN A M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER CIC BHAWAN, BABA GANGNATH MARG, MUNIRKA, NEW DELHI - 110 067 2. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF COMMISSIONER NIRVACHAN SADAN, ASHOKA ROAD, NEW DELHI - 110 001 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.N. KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI S.R. DODWAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF R-1 REJECTING THE APPEAL ON PROCEDURAL GROUNDS I.E., ANNEXURE-J DATED 09.08.2024 (REF 63344/2024) AND ETC. Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28133 WP No. 9460 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: (a) To issue a writ of certiorari to quash the order of Respondent No.1 rejecting the appeal on procedural grounds i.e., ANNEXURE-J dated 09.08.2024 (Ref 63344/2024) (b) To issue a writ of mandamus directing Respondent No.2 to provide the information sought under RTI applications i.e., ANNEXURE-A and ANNEXURE-B dated 03.05.2024 respectively (order Number 49F263573) and order Number 49F26354; (c) Grant such other reliefs as deemed fit in the interest of justice and equity. 2. What has been challenged is Annexure-J, which is the order of return of the appeal filed by the Petitioner on the ground that in the appeal there were two orders which had been challenged. 3. Respondent No.1 called upon the Petitioner to file two separate appeals since two different orders were under challenge. The said order at Annexure-J is - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28133 WP No. 9460 of 2025 only an administrative order passed at the scrutiny for removal of deficiencies in the appeal filed and is not a quasi-judicial order determining the rights of the parties. Hence, reserving liberty to the Petitioner to file two separate appeals in compliance with the deficiencies pointed out at Annexure-J, the petition stands disposed. 4. If the appeals are filed, the respondents are directed to consider the same in accordance with law. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE KTY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 74