THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.9519 of 2010 Dated:26.04.2010 Between: Palavalasa Mahalakshmi, And others. …Petitioners And The Tahsildar, Chinagadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam Rural, And another. ...Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.9519 of 2010 ORDER: The six petitioners statedly are residents of Madhurawada in Visakhapatnam. It is their case that they raised huts in the land in survey No.27 of Siva Sakthi Nagar. When the land was sought to be allotted to I.T Company, objections were raised. The Government proposed to provide alternative house sites at the foot of the hill in the same survey number to all the occupants. Petitioners were, however, not given house sites though house sites were distributed to other persons. Through their Lawyer, they submitted an application to the first respondent under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (the Act), to provide information (detailed hereafter). First respondent furnished the information to the petitioners’ Counsel. They again submitted another application in response to which, the first respondent issued letter dated 14.02.2009 informing that the information was already furnished. Again the copies of the information were enclosed in the said letter. The letter furnished to the petitioners’ Lawyer on 20.01.2009 reads as under. This information is given to you under the Right to Information Act, 2005. Sl.No Information requested by you Details of the information 1. Request letter 2.4.2008 for was given in your office regarding the removal of the thatched houses in Sy.No.27 of Siva Shakti Nagar. Please furnish the eligibility criteria for reallocation of house sites to the victims. The applications given by 6 victims of Sy.No.27 of Siva Shakti Nagar, Madhurawada Village are not eligible for reallocation of house sites because they were not residing there. 2. Please furnish the list of beneficiaries who are reallocated. The list is enclosed with this letter after a proper investigation regarding the reallocation of the house sites in Sy.No.27, Siva Shakti Nagar, Madhurawada. The petitioners are aggrieved by the observation made by the Tahsildar that the six petitioners are not eligible for reallocation of house sites because they were not residing therein. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. Petitioners’ Counsel relies on the household card of the fourth petitioner in support of the contention that the allegation that they were not residents of survey No.27 is not correct, and a direction should be issued to the respondents to allot the house sites. The Act confers a right on every citizen to seek information furnishing of which is not prohibited under Section 8 or Section 11 of the Act. When once a person has asked information and the request is complied with, the purpose of the Act is served. The correctness of the information is not the subject matter of the Act and remedy lies elsewhere. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the finding of the Tahsildar that they were not residing in Survey No.27, their remedy is to go to higher authorities like the Revenue Divisional Officer and seek redressal. The Writ Petition is not proper remedy. The Writ Petition is therefore dismissed. ____________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 26.04.2010 vs