IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Stay application No.3282 of 2010 Impleadment./Intervention Application No.4017 of 2010 In Writ Petition No. 664 of 2010 (M/S) 1. Sunil Singh, S/o Sri J.F. Singh. 2. Suniti Singh, W/o Sri Sunil Singh. ……Petitioners Versus Chief Information Commissioner and others. …….Respondents. Mr. M.C. Kandpal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Yogesh Shah, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Vipul Sharma, Advocate for the respondent No.1. Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, Addl. C.S.C. for the respondent Nos. 2 to 5. Mr. V.K. Kohli, Senior Advocate with Mr. T.C. Pandey, Advocate for the intervenor. Dated:-09-06-2010 Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought following reliefs:- (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the judgment and orders dated 29-10-2009 and 3-11-2009 passed by the respondent Nos. 3 and 1 (contained as annexure nos. 4 and 5 respectively.) (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondent authorities not to pass any order on the basis of order dated 29-10-2009 and 3-11-2009 passed by the 2 respondent No.3 and 1(contained as annexure Nos. 4 and 5 respectively.) (iii) Issue any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances f the case be passed in favour of the petitioners. (iv) Cost of the petition be awarded in favour of the petitioners. Brief facts in short are that the petitioners have sought information regarding sale and purchase of Christian property. No decision was taken by the District Magistrate, then the petitioner preferred appeal before the Commissioner, Kumaun Mandal, Nainital, who pass the order on 14-05-2009 and directed to give information to the District Magistrate/Public Information Officer in compliance of said order, the District Magistrate issued a letter to Deputy Registrar, Ranikhet, Bhikiyasen asking about the alleged transfer. No information was given to the petitioners then the petitioners preferred second appeal. A show cause notice was issued by the Chief Information Commissioner to the authorities concerned in reply thereto an enquiry report in form of the order was submitted to the Chief Information Commissioner being satisfied from the report of the District Magistrate, the 2nd appeal was disposed of by the Chief Information Commissioner on 03-11-2009, thereafter this writ petition has been filed. The grievance of the petitioners is that the learned District Magistrate, Almora has given detailed report to the Chief Information Commissioner, the observations made in the report may effect the petitioner rights in other cases pending between the parties. In view of the fact that the report was submitted by the District Magistrate under the Right to Information Act. This report 3 cannot be read in future in other cases, which are pending between the parties in competent court of jurisdiction. Since no opportunity of hearing was afforded by the District Magistrate prior to submit the report, which is in form of the order. With the said observation, the writ petition is disposed of finally. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly. (B.S.Verma, J.) 09-06-2010 MK