wp3916.11.odt 1/3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETN. NO.3916/2011 Rashmi Gas Agency and others -vs- Central Information Commission and others ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders. or directions and Registrar's orders. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Shri A. Parchure, learned counsel for the petitioners. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : 24.08.2011. By this petition, the petitioners impugn the order passed by the respondent No.1, Central Information Commission on 31/12/2007 as also the order passed by the Indian Oil Corporation on 08/08/2011. It appears that the respondent No.3 was an employee of the petitioner No.2 and had applied under the Right To Information Act seeking details of new gas connections and refill supplies by all the LPG Distributors in Nagpur Region. It was the case of the respondent No.3 that there was considerable pilferage in the distribution of gas cylinders and, therefore, he had sought for disclosure of the information so as to identify the sources of corruption in distribution of petroleum products mainly LPG cylinders. The Central Information Commission was of the view that it was desirable to allow the respondent No.3, the access to the information sought by the respondent No.3. The Indian Oil Corporation was directed to wp3916.11.odt 2/3 supply the information to the respondent No.3 by advising the concerned gas agencies in Nagpur Region to allow inspection of relevant records as identified by the respondent No.3. It appears that in pursuance of the order dated 31st December, 2007, the Indian Oil Corporation directed the petitioners to supply the relevant information to the respondent No.3 in the year 2008 and the petitioners have supplied information to the respondent No.3. Again, when by the impugned communication dated 8th August, 2011 addressed by the Indian Oil Corporation to the respondent No.3, the respondent No.3 was asked to peruse the documents from the office of the petitioners and the petitioners were asked to co-operate that the petitioners have preferred this petition challenging the order dated 31/12/2007 and the communication dated 08/08/20011. There is nothing wrong with the impugned order dated 31st December, 2007 as no direction is issued against the petitioners in the said impugned order. Only the Indian Oil Corporation is asked to advise the concerned gas agencies in Nagpur to allow the respondent No.3 to inspect the relevant records. In fact, the order dated 31/12/2007 is acquiesced by the petitioners and the petitioners have supplied the information to the respondent No.3 on the request of the Indian Oil Corporation. In this background, the challenge to the order dated 31/12/2007 cannot be entertained, specially when the same made after nearly four years. The communication dated wp3916.11.odt 3/3 8th August, 2011 is a private matter between the Indian Oil Corporation and the petitioners. The petitioners do not have any legal right to challenge the communication dated 8th August, 2011 by filing a writ petition, specially when the communication is not based on the order dated 31/12/2007, which is complied with. In the aforesaid set of facts, there is no reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 31/12/2007 and the communication dated 08/08/2011. In the result the writ petition fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE KHUNTE