Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010136202026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3685/2026 TANUJA UZIR D/O LATE MALIN CHANDRA UZIR, R/O DOTMA CHARIALI,P.O AND P.S DOTMA, DISTRICT- KOKRAJHAR (BTAD) ASSAM, PIN 783347 VERSUS THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEYS RAJASWA BHAWAN, RUPNAGAR, GUWAHATI 32, KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S SINHA, Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 20-07-2026 Heard Mr. S. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A. Bhattacharyya, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for the respondent. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court by the instant writ petition seeking to invoke the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 Page No.# 2/3 of the Constitution of India. The brief facts leading to filing of the writ petition are as follows :- 3. The petitioner seeking certain information regarding a plot of land, filed an application before the State Public Information Officer, O/o the Director of Land Records & Survey, Assam, Guwahati under Section 6 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 on 10.12.2025. The petitioner has raised a grievance that after submission of the application on 10.12.2025, no information, as sought for by the petitioner, has been provided to the petitioner till the time of institution of the writ petition. 4. Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department has submitted that as per provisions of sub-section [1] of Section 19 of the Right to Information Act [‘RTI Act’, for short], any person, who, does not receive a decision within the time specified in sub-section [1] or Clause [a] of sub-section 3 of Section 7, may within 30 days from the expiry of such period can prefer an appeal to such officer who is senior in rank to the State Public Information Officer and the petitioner has not preferred any appeal under sub-section [1] of Section 19 of the RTI Act and has directly approached this Court by the instant writ petition. 5. In response, Mr. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the period envisaged in Section 19[1] of the RTI Act has already expired and the petitioner has no other remedy. 6. The proviso to sub-section [1] of Section 19 has provided that the 1st Appellate Authority who is authorized to admit an appeal, may admit an appeal after expiry of the period of 30 days after he is satisfied that the appellant was Page No.# 3/3 prevented by sufficient cause from filing of the appeal within the time prescribed by Section 19[1] of the RTI Act. 7. In view of the aforesaid provision contained in proviso to sub-section [1] of Section 19, it is still open to the petitioner to avail the remedy of preferring an appeal showing sufficient cause showing the reason which prevented him from filing the appeal within time. 8. This writ petition is not entertained in view of the option still available to the petitioner to prefer an appeal in terms of Section 19[1] of the RTI Act read with the proviso thereof. The petitioner shall, therefore, exhaust the remedy of appeal under Section 19[1] of the RTI Act before the 1st Appellate Authority showing sufficient cause as to what prevented him from filing the appeal in time. It is observed that if such an appeal is filed by the petitioner before the 1st Appellate Authority, the 1st Appellate Authority shall consider the reason shown by the petitioner for preferring the appeal beyond the period of limitation prescribed under sub-section [1] of Section 19 of the RTI Act, at first, and if the 1st Appellate Authority is of the view that the petitioner has been able to show sufficient cause for preferring the appeal with delay, then the 1st Appellate Authority shall, thereafter, proceed to consider the appeal on its own merits and in accordance with law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant