1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. WRIT PETITION NO.1952 OF 2007 Ms. Jane Cox ..Petitioner. Vs. Central Information Commissioner and others ..Respondents. .... Mr. C.U. Singh, Senior Advocate i/b Maria Sakharani for the Petitioner. Mr. Shrinivasan with Mr. Kiran Kandpile for Respondents 1, 2, 3 and 5. Ms. Veena Thadani i/b Ms. Sushma Singh for Respondent No.4. .... CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. 16th October, 2007. P.C. : 1. The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order dated 7th June, 2007 passed by the Central Information Commissioner. In view of the course of action we propose to adopt while disposing of this Writ Petition, it would not be necessary for us to notice the factual aspects in this case. 2. Suffice it to record that during the hearing of this Writ Petition with the intervention of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties which in our opinion is a fair stand to take, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the consent that the order 2 dated 7th June, 2007 will not be given effect to. The directions issued for disclosure of information would stand deleted subject to the condition that Respondent No.4 shall have the right to pray for production of the very same documents in another Writ Petition being Writ Petition No.1728 of 2005. Such prayer for production of documents shall be examined by the Court while dealing with that Writ Petition. The Petitioner herein would be at liberty to take such objections as are permissible to her in accordance with law. We may also notice that the very fact that F.R.R.O. is not a party to that Writ Petition will not be of much relevance as far as the production of documents is concerned. Even that question is left open. 3. Consequently the Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms and we direct that Writ Petition 1728 of 2005 be listed for hearing. A copy of this order be placed on the file of Writ Petition 1782 of 2007. CHIEF JUSTICE DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.