1. The present petition has been preferred with a short grievance that despite repeated requests, neither the petitioner’s Right to Information (RTI) applications, nor the appeal preferred by it, are being decided by the respondent no.2.
2. Issue notice. Mr. Dev P. Bhardwaj and Mr.Manjit Pathak accept notice on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2 respectively.
3. Keeping in view the nature of relief sought in the present petition, no counter affidavit is called for.
4. Even though, learned counsel for respondent no.2 seeks to urge that a writ petition assailing the subject matter of information sought in the RTI applications already stands rejected, I am unable to appreciate as to how that would preclude the petitioner from seeking information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act). In fact, there is no reason as to why the respondent no.2 ought not to deal with the petitioner’s RTI applications expeditiously. In my view, if the respondent no.2 is permitted to treat the rejection of a writ petition earlier preferred by the petitioner as a ground for not disposing of its applications, submitted under the RTI Act, the same would defeat the very purpose of the said Act.
5. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed by directing respondent no.2 to expeditiously decide the petitioner’s applications dated 14.12.2020 and 31.12.2020 as per the laid down procedure, within a period of four weeks, as prayed for.
6. Needless to state, this Court has not expressed any opinion as regards the inter se disputes between the parties.