IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 28TH JUNE 2011 / 7TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17330 of 2011(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.SANKARANARAYANA BHAT, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O.GANAPATHI BHAT, MOGASALE HOUSE, KOLLIYOOR P.O. AND VILLAGE, (VIA) MANJESHWAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671323. BY ADV. SRI.K.SHRIHARI RAO SMT.N.SHOBHA SRI.K.S.BALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR GENERAL, A-506, STATESMAN HOUSE, B-148, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001. 2. C.A.BALASUBRAMANIAN, GENERAL MANAGER(TS) AND CHIEF PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, KERALA TELECOM CIRCLE, BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., TRIVANDRUM-595033. 3. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, KERALA TELECOME CIRCLE, BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., TRIVANDRUM-595033. 4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, HEAD QUARTERS, TRIVANDRUM. ADV. SRI.P.J.PHILIP,SC,BSNL(BHARAT SANCHAR N FOR R1-3 SC SRI.MATHEW K.PHILIP GP SMT. RAJASREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 17330 of 2011 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 12.3.07 OF THE PETITIONER EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26.3.07 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 8.1.10 OF THE SYNDICATE BANK, TVM EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11.7.07 OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICE, KASARAGOD EXT.P5- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.6.07 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT OF THE SECOND RESPONDENT EXT.P6- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 1.2.10 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE THIRD RESPONDENT EXT.P7- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 1.2.10 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT (True Copy) P.A. To Judge P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).17330/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 28th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayer:- Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing the third respondent to consider Ext.P6 and pass appropriate orders thereon and thereby take action against the 2nd respondent for issuing Ext.P5 letter. 2. The basic grievance of the petitioner appears to be that in spite of satisfying the due amount as the additional fee stipulated by the second respondent vide Ext.P2 by way of Demand Draft sent by registered post, communication has been issued by the second respondent as borne by Ext.P5 stating that no such amount has been received and instructing the petitioner to prefer an appeal, if aggrieved, before the Chief General Manager, Telecom who is the first appellate authority under the RTI Act. It was pursuant to this, that the petitioner preferred Ext.P6 before the third respondent. W.P.(C).17330/11 2 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the stand reflected from Ext.P5 is seen contrary to the actual facts and figures, in so far as the Postal Department has conveyed as per Ext.P4, that the concerned postal cover was delivered to the addressee on the date specified therein and further, the concerned Bank has clarified as per Ext.P3 that, a sum of Rs.62/- covered by the Demand Draft No.565153 dated 20.4.2007 stands already credited to the account of the BSNL. The learned counsel submits that the matter has to be dealt with seriously by the third respondent, which hence is sought for. 4. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the BSNL submits that the third respondent is ready to consider Ext.P6, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner with reference to the contents of Exts.P3 and P4 within the shortest possible time. 5. In the above circumstances, the third respondent is directed to consider Ext.P6 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, with reference to all the relevant materials including W.P.(C).17330/11 3 Exts.P3 and P4 and of course, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within 'six weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, Judge mrcs