IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 4835 of 2008 Between: K.Ravindra Babu S/o.Venkaya Bhavani Nagar Plot owners Welfare Association No.10, Little Rock Apartments,Miyapur Hyd ..... PETITIONER AND 1 A.P.I.C(under Right to information Act 2005) Rep.by its Chief Information Commissioner HACA Bhavan Hyderabad 2 Appellate Authority & Joint Collector Office of Dist Collector Medak Dist Sanga Reddy 3 Public Information officer & Dist Revenue Officer Office of Dist Collector Medak Dist Sanga Reddy .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ,order or direction declaring the impugned action of the respondents in not furnishing the requisite information under the right to information Act (RTI Act) and even the 1st respondent 2nd Appellate authority closing the petition though his orders No.Appeal No.2712/CIC/2007 dt.11-02-2008 without follwing the due process of Law as illegal,arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice etc and consequently to (a) call for the records of the file no Appeal No.2712/CIC/2007 filed by the petitioner before respondent No.1 and (b) to quash the impugned order dt.11-02-2008(c) direct 3rd respondent to provide information which Ihave required in my representation under RTI Act 2005 and (d) Direct the respondent no 1to initiate action against respondent No.2 &3 for perjury (e) direct the respondent No.1 impose penalties as per Section 20(1) and 20(2) of RTI Act Rs 250 per day till date of furnishing the information sought for or maximum of Rs 25,000 and (f) direct respondent No.1 to recommend departmental proceedings under the service rules against respondent No.2 as compulsory required by the for not furnishing information within time frame and providing false information with malafidely and knowingly adn (g) direct the respondent no 1not to close the case till such time as the petitioner receive satisfactory information to direct the respondents to give the required information as per provisions of RTI Act 2005 and to direct 1st respondent to look into the appelas properly to ensure accountability of public Authorities and 1st Appellate Authorities give Point wise reply and impose the penalities against erring public information officers and grant such other just and consequential relief or reliefs Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.N.V.ANANTHA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 4835 of 2008 Order: The petitioner claims that he is owner of plots bearing Nos.B-852, B-864 and B-869, situated in Survey Nos.192 and A-651 and 196 of Bhavani Nagar, Kollur village, Sangareddy Taluk, Medak District. On the ground that he is unable to identify the said plots as the demarcation stones were removed, he made an application dated 09.10.2006 to the 3rd respondent, namely the District Revenue Officer, Sangareddy, requesting him to direct the officials concerned to survey and demarcate his plots. As no action thereon was taken, he filed appeal in Appeal No. 2712/CIC/2007 before the 1st respondent, namely the A.P. Information Commission, but the same, by order dated 11.02.2008, was closed. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Sri S.S. Prasad, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent submits that the petitioner has not made the request properly and as such the information as sought for by him was not provided, and contended that the writ petition filed by the petitioner cannot be entertained. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue submitted that the petitioner has to make a request to the Mandal Surveyor by paying requisite fee for survey of his plots, but the petitioner instead of approaching the Mandal Surveyor has approached the other revenue authorities, who have nothing to do with the survey of land. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Counsel for the 1st respondent and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: The petitioner is directed to approach the Mandal Surveyor, Ramachandrapuram by way of appropriate application accompanied with requisite fee requesting him to survey the lands, and if any such application is made, the Mandal Surveyor, Ramachandrapuram shall survey the lands, and pass appropriate orders on the application of the petitioner, expeditiously, within four weeks time. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 11.03.2008 Nsr ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR}