Calcutta High Court
WPA/458/2026 of R SASIDHARAN Vs THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND ANOTHER on 7 September 2026
HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WPA/458/2026 R. Sasidharan Vs The Deputy Commissioner and another Mr. R. Pradeep … for the petitioner Ms. Babita Das … for the respondents September 7,2026 [SR] Item No.9 1. The first appeal filed by the petitioner under
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ]
***
WPA/458/2026
R. Sasidharan
Vs
The Deputy Commissioner and another
Mr. R. Pradeep
… for the petitioner
Ms. Babita Das
… for the respondents
September 7,2026
[SR]
Item No.9
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The first appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 19(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 on 23.02.2026 has not been disposed of till date.
2. Prayer has been made to direct the authority to dispose of the said appeal.
3. Learned advocate representing the respondents opposes the submission of the petitioner.
4. It has been submitted that the provision for second appeal being available to the petitioner, the instant writ petition ought not to be entertained.
5. Upon hearing the parties and on perusal of the documents annexed to the petitioner, it appears that the first appeal filed by the petitioner is pending consideration before the Deputy Commissioner, North and Middle Andaman District, Mayabunder. The authority ought to have disposed of the said appeal within the statutory time period.
6. It is true that the petitioner has an alternative remedy of preferring a second appeal against the inaction on the part of the first appellate authority to dispose of the appeal, but at the same time, it is settled law that availability of alternative remedy is not a complete bar to invoke writ jurisdiction for securing relief.
7. The Court also notices that the petitioner is aged about 70 years and directing the petitioner to avail the remedy of second appeal only for obtaining one information from the authority may be a difficult task for him.
8. In view of the above, the instant writ petition stands disposed of by directing the Deputy Commissioner, North and Middle Andaman, being the respondent no.1 herein, to dispose of the first appeal preferred by the petitioner under section 19(1) of the Act, in accordance with law at the earliest but positively within a period of thirty days from the date of communication of this order.
9. There shall be no order as to costs.
10. All parties are directed to act on a server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Amrita Sinha, J. )