Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010164742024 2026:GAU-AS:3507 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4195/2024 SANJIB TAMULI SON OF SRI JUGESWAR TAMULI, VILLAGE- TANGANAPORA AHOM GAON, P.O.- JAMUGURI PANCHALI, P.S. DHEMAJI, DISTRICT- DHEMAJI, ASSAM, PIN- 787057 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006 2:THE STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY THE STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER ASSAM JURIPAR PANJABARI GUWAHATI- 781037 3:THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER FOOD PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 4:THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER (SPIO) FOOD CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS DHEMAJI DISTRICT- DHEMAJI PIN- 787057 Page No.# 2/4 5:THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOOD PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS DHEMAJI DISTRICT- DHEMAJI PIN- 787057 6:THE PROPRIETOR M/S DHEMAJI R.F. MILL DHEMAJI RAILWAY STATION ROAD (NEAR DHEMAJI POST OFFICE) DHEMAJI TOWN WARD NO. 3 P.O. P.S. AND DISTRICT- DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 78705 For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. N. Sarma, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Dutta, Sr. Advocate : Mr. S. Dutta, Advocate : Mr. K. Gogoi, Government Advocate : Mr. D. Deka, Standing Counsel BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER Date : 09.03.2026 Heard Mr. N. Sarma, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. K. Gogoi, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5. I have also heard Mr. D. Deka, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.2 and Mr. S. Page No.# 3/4 Dutta, the learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. Dutta, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.6. 2. The Petitioner herein has approached this Court alleging that in spite of specific directions being issued by the Respondent No.2, the other Respondents including the private Respondent i.e. the Respondent No.6 have not provided the information. 3. This Court has duly perused the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short ‘the Act of 2005’) and more particularly Section 20 of the said Act of 2005 which stipulates various provisions of penalties. This Court has also taken note of the action taken reports submitted by the Respondents herein. The question therefore arises as to whether this Court should exercise its writ jurisdiction in the present proceedings when the Respondent No.2 has powers under Section 20 of the Act of 2005 to take action. It is the opinion of this Court that the present proceedings should not be entertained taking into account that the Respondent No.2 can very well be approached for taking action as provided under law. 4. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands closed. 5. The closure of the instant writ petition shall not preclude the Petitioner to approach the Respondent No.2 seeking Page No.# 4/4 initiation of penalties against the official Respondents, if so permissible under law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant