IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.24345 of 2011 Between: K.Sri Rekha ..... PETITIONER AND The Union of India, rep.by Secretary, Min.of Home Affairs, Govt.of India, Jaisalmer House, 26 Man Singh Road, New Delhi and 5 others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.24345 of 2011 ORDER: Petitioner has already filed WP.31511/2010 before this Court, in which, this Court has recorded an order dated 20.06.2011, which reads as follows: “The third respondent appeared. At the request of the learned counsel for the third respondent, post on 23- 06-2011. The appearance of the third respondent is dispensed with until further orders. He shall, however, inform this court before leaving the country.” Subsequently, the petitioner made an application under Right to Information Act, addressed to all the respondents, seeking information relating to arrival/departure of her husband. That application was responded to by the Ministry of Home Affairs under the proceedings dated 13.07.2011, directing the Bureau of Immigration to respond. In pursuance thereto, the Deputy Director, Bureau of Information, in his proceedings dated 26.07.2011, informed the petitioner that since the Bureau, the 3rd respondent herein, is exempted under Sec.24(1) and Second Schedule of Chapter VI of Right to Information Act, 2005, the information sought for cannot be provided. The petitioner was also informed that if he is not satisfied with the said proceedings, he may file appeal before the Appellate Authority. Petitioner has not filed any appeal admittedly, and has filed the present writ petition, questioning the inaction of the respondents in furnishing information. Even after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am unable to see any legal right of the petitioner being infringed, when he accepts that the 3rd respondent is exempted under Right to Information Act, and cannot be compelled to part with the information under Right to Information Act. So far as other aspects are concerned, they are already the subject matter of the W.P.31511/2010. In that view of the matter, this Writ Petition appears misconceived, and is accordingly dismissed. This order, however, will not preclude the petitioner from preferring any appeal, as stated in the impugned order of the 3rd respondent. No order as to costs. ________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR,J Dated: 29.08.2011 Dsr