Madras High Court
S.Chandrababu vs The Commissioner on 13 August, 2025
WP No. 29687 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13-08-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N. MALA
WP No. 29687 of 2025
S.Chandrababu
S/o.Sri Ramulu.
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Commissioner,
Tamil Nadu Information Commission,
FANEPET, Nandanam,
Chennai-600035.
2.The Appellate Authority,
Additional Commissioner of Police,
O/o.Greater Chennai Commissioner of
Police, Vepery, Chennai-600 007.
3.The Public Information Officer,
Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Koyambedu District, Chennai-600 095.
4.The Inspector of Police,
R9 Police Station,
Valassaravakkam Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 03:32:45 pm )
WP No. 29687 of 2025
5.Praveen Mathew
S/o.Rajeev Mathew.
Respondent(s)
PRAYER:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to furnish the
complaint dated 23.11.2024 and its connected papers to the petitioner on RTI
Letter dated 01.04.2025 within a short span of time that may be fixed by this
Court.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.A.Poornachandran
For Respondent(s): Mr.C.Vigneshwaran,
Standing Counsel for R1
Mr.Dr.C.E.Pratap,
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
for R2 To R4
ORDER
The writ petition has been filed for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to furnish the complaint dated 23.11.2024, and its connected papers to the petitioner pursuant to his RTI letter dated 01.04.2025, within a time frame that may be fixed by this Court.
2.Mr.C.Vigneshwaran, learned Standing Counsel takes notice for R1 and Mr.Dr.C.E.Pratap, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) takes notice for R2 to R4.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 03:32:45 pm ) WP No. 29687 of 2025
3.By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
4.The petitioner states that the fifth respondent lodged a complaint against the President, Secretary and the petitioner, who is a member of the Welfare Association, to the fourth respondent police. Based on the complaint, the petitioner was orally asked to report before the fourth respondent for enquiry.
According to the petitioner, the fifth respondent, as a counter blast to the petitioner's request for information from the Corporation of Chennai, about the fifth respondent under the RTI Act, had lodged the complaint against the petitioner and two other office bearers of the Welfare Association. The petitioner therefore requested the police authorities to furnish the complaint lodged by the fifth respondent. As the complaint copy was not furnished, the petitioner submitted a letter to the third respondent seeking a copy of the complaint, under the RTI Act. The petitioner states that the third respondent in his reply by invoking Section 8 (1)(g) of the RTI Act, refused to furnish the complaint copy to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the reply of the third https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 03:32:45 pm ) WP No. 29687 of 2025 respondent, the petitioner filed an appeal to the second respondent, on 03.04.2025. The second respondent in his reply dated 01.05.2025, stated that the copy of the complaint of the fifth respondent was annexed along with the reply, but however, the same was not annexed.
5.The petitioner further states that as the second and third respondents misused the provisions of Section 8 (1)(g) of the RTI Act, for denying the copy of the complaint to the petitioner, the petitioner filed second appeal to the first respondent on 07.04.2025. As no action was taken by the first respondent, the petitioner filed the above writ petition.
6.The learned counsel for the first respondent admitted that the petitioner filed Second Appeal and that the same is pending. The counsel sought reasonable time to dispose the second appeal.
7.In view of the submissions by the learned counsel for the first respondent, the first respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 03:32:45 pm ) WP No. 29687 of 2025 orders in the Second Appeal, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8.With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of.
No costs.
13-08-2025 sli Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No To
1. The Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Information Commission, FANEPET, Nandanam, Chennai-600035.
2.The Appellate Authority, Additional Commissioner of Police, O/o.Greater Chennai Commissioner of Police, Vepery, Chennai-600 007.
3.The Public Information Officer, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Koyambedu District, Chennai-600 095.
4.The Inspector of Police, R9 Police Station, Valassaravakkam Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 03:32:45 pm ) WP No. 29687 of 2025 N.MALA J.
sli WP No. 29687 of 2025 13-08-2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2025 03:32:45 pm )