IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2010 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 26979 of 2008(J) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- R.JAYAMOHANAN, S/O.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, A 34, FACT TOWN SHIP, UDYOGAMANDAL P.O. KERALA, (ASST.MANAGER, PRODUCTION, UDYOGAMANDAL). BY SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADVS. SRI.RAJESH. K.RAJU, SRI.S.SHARAN, SMT.P.USHAKUMARI. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. R.N.DHAR, GENERAL MANAGER CUM COMPANY SECRETARY AND PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, IIBI, REGISTERED & CORPORATE OFFICE: 19, NETAJI SUBHAS ROAD, KOLKOTTA - 700 001. 2. DR.TAMAL DATTA CHAUDHURI, CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER INCHARGE AND APPELLATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, IIBJ, 19 NETAJI SUBHAS ROAD, KOLKOTTA - 700 001. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.26979 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. 1.The writ petitioner invoked the provisions of the Right to Information Act and required the respondent, an officer of the Industrial Investment Bank of India Ltd. to give certain information relating to M/s.Sudarsan Clay & Ceramics Ltd. Ultimately, the parties were before the Central Information Commissioner and the Commissioner had issued a direction that the petitioner be given a copy of the materials sought for by him in spite of the fact that certain other materials were earlier furnished. 2.This writ petition is footed on the allegation that the officials of IIBI are not giving effect to the decision of the Central Information Commissioner. We are clear in our mind that no WPC.26979/08. 2 writ of mandamus or other direction would be issued as a further whip to obey the command of the Central Information Commissioner. This is all the more so because when an order issued under the Right To Information Act by the competent authority is not complied with, the said statute has sufficient teeth to reach at the erring persons who fail to obey the command in terms of that statute. With the aforesaid, we did not find any ground to entertain this writ petition. This writ petition is hence dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the competent authority under the Right To Information Act as against the respondents in accordance with law. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, Judge. kkb.31/05.