IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 17.02.2011 Coram THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K.SHARMA W.P.No.17457 of 2008 and M.P.Nos.1,2 of 2008 R.Athiseshan ...Petitioner -vs- 1.The Deputy Registrar Erode Circle, Erode, Erode District 2.The Special Officer, A.A.226, Modakkurichi Primary Agricultural Co-op Bank, Modakkurichi, Erode District. 3.N.S.Krishnan ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the entire records relating to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.10223/2007 PACB, dated 29.01.2008 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prakasam For Respondents : Mr.B.Vijay, Govt. Advocate for R1 Mr.M.Dhandapani for R2 Mr.S.T.S.Murthi for R3. ORDER Petitioner has approached this court with a prayer for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari, for quashing the order dated 29.01.2008 passed by the 1st respondent directing, the 2nd respondent to furnish the loan details of the petitioner, to the 3rd respondent. 2. The petitioner is a member of the 2nd respondent bank with membership No.3673. The 3rd respondent filed application under https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Right to Information Act, for obtaining information regarding the personal loan, and benefits of the waiver of the loan, given by the Government to the petitioner. The requisite information was not supplied to the 3rd respondent. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the object of 3rd respondent was to blackmail the petitioner, and other similarly placed members of 2nd respondent. The 3rd respondent made an application to the 2nd respondent under section 8(J) Right to Information Act, though he had no legal right, therefore no order was passed by the 2nd respondent. 4. The 1st respondent treating itself as Appellate Authority, passed impugned order directing the 2nd respondent to furnish the details qua petitioner to the 3rd respondent. The 1st respondent has no authority over the 2nd respondent under the Right to Information Act. The remedies are available to aggrieved party under the Act. The 1st respondent under the Tamil Nadu Corporation Societies Act has no jurisdiction to issue any such direction under the Right to Information Act to give any information even if permissible under the Right to Information Act. The impugned order passed by the 1st respondent being without jurisdiction is liable to be quashed. 5. For the reasons stated writ petition is allowed. The impugned order passed by the 1st respondent is ordered to be quashed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. kpr Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar To 1.The Deputy Registrar Erode Circle, Erode, Erode District 2.The Special Officer, A.A.226, Modakkurichi Primary Agricultural Co-op Bank, Modakkurichi, Erode District. + 1 cc to Mr. C. Prakasam, Advocate SR No.12208 + 1 cc to Government Pleader, SR No.12096 JSV(CO) SR/7.3.2011 W.P.No.17457 of 2008 and M.P.Nos.1,2 of 2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/