In fact, a perusal of the pleadings, more particularly, the
application made by the second respondent as well as the counter affidavit filed
in this Writ Petition, would show that the second respondent has not disclosed
even the basic reason for seeking those informations. On the other hand, he has
made those applications mechanically, as a matter of routine under the RTI Act.
The Division Bench of this Court, in the said decision, has also observed that the
first respondent in that Writ Petition who is similar to the present second
respondent, has no locus-standi to seek for the details sought for by him, as he
has no enforceable legal right.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU
W.P.No.26781 of 2013
& M.P.No.1 of 2013
The Public Information Officer,
The Registrar (Administration),
High Court, Madras.
1. The Central Information Commission,