BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL

Present: Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, B.Com B.L., President

And

Sri. M.Krishna Reddy, M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member

And

         Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member

Tuesday the 14^th day of February, 2012

C.C.No.166/2011

Between:

N.Sunkanna, S/o N.Dubbanna,

H.No.1-169/1, Resident of Gorantla Village,Temple Street, Kodumur Mandal - 518 467, Kurnool District.                                                                 

…Complainant

                                       -Vs-

The Thasildar, Near R & B Guest House,

H.No.19, Konda Peta,Kodumur - 518 464, Kurnool District.                

                                ...Opposite ParTy

This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of In person for complainant and In person for opposite party and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.                             

   ORDER

                  (As per Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, President)

   C.C. No.166/2011

1.     This complaint is filed under section 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying:-

1. To direct the opposite party to furnish the required information to the complainant;

1. To grant a sum of Rs.83,000/- towards mental agony;
2. To grant such other reliefs as the Honourable Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.             

2.    The case of the complainant in brief is as under:- The complainant made a requisition to the public information officer cum Thasildar, Kodumur seeking information regarding present and past F.P. dealers names and Voter Identity Card of Dodi Ayyanna.  The said application was submitted by the complainant on 14-10-20011.  The application was acknowledged by the opposite party, but no information was received from the opposite party.   The appeal was preferred to the Revenue Divisional Officer who is an appellant authority.  The appellate authority issued instructions to the opposite party to furnish the required information to the applicant.  The opposite party did not respond on the instructions given by the appellate authority.  The complainant suffered mental agony as the opposite party did not furnish information.  Hence the complaint.

3.     Opposite party filed written version stating that the information sought by the complaint was sent to the complainant through Village Servant Gorantla.  As the complainant was not in the Village the said information could not be furnished to him by Village Servant.  The complainant sough the information with bad intention.  The copy of the information sought by the complainant is filed along with the written version.  The complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4.     Now the points that arise for consideration are:

1. Whether the complaint is maintainable?

1. Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed for?

1. To what relief?

5.      POINTS i and ii:- Admittedly the complainant sought some information from the opposite party.  As the opposite party did not furnish the said information within the time the complainant filed the present complaint against the opposite party.  It is the contention of the opposite party that the complainant sought the information with bad intention and that the complainant was not certain as to the information required.  Along with the written version the opposite party submitted the information sough by the complainant.    

6.     In the Revision Petition No.4061/2010 [T.Pundlika –Vs- Revenue Department (Service Division) Government of Karnataka] the National Commission held that the petitioner under R.T.I. Act, 2005 cannot be claimed to be a Consumer under the Consumers Protection Act, 2005.  In view of the decision cited above it can be said that the complainant herein is not a Consumer as defined under section 2 (1) (d) of the C.P. Act.  The present complainant who sought information under R.T.I. Act cannot be termed as a Consumer under section 2 (1) (d) of the C.P. Act and the present complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable.  The complainant is not entitled for any relief.

 8.    In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.

        Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 14^th day of February, 2012.

 Sd/-                                                Sd/-                                          Sd/-

MALE MEMBER                      PRESIDENT                 LADY MEMBER

                                 APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

                                    Witnesses Examined

For the complainant : Nil                 For the opposite party : Nill

List of exhibits marked for the complainant:- NILL

List of exhibits marked for the opposite party:- NILL

Sd/-                                        Sd/-                                          Sd/-

MALE MEMBER                 PRESIDENT                   LADY MEMBER

    // Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the

A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//

Copy to:-

Complainant and Opposite parties  :

Copy was made ready on             :

Copy was dispatched on               :