Ved Prakash Aggarwal v. Deputy Registrar, National Green Tribunal, New Delhi

1. Being aggrieved and feeling dissatisfied with the order dated 23.07.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) No. 2226/2021 (Annexure A-1 to the memo of this Appeal), present Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the Appellant (Original Petitioner).

2. Appellant, who appears in person and claims to be a social worker had filed the aforementioned writ petition seeking a direction to the Deputy 2021:DHC:2877-DB 18.12.2020 preferred under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘RTI Act’), which had been rejected on 03.02.2021, on the ground that the Appellant was neither a party nor an aggrieved person and was, thus, not entitled to the documents sought by him.

3. Appellant has not taken the trouble of placing on record the application dated 18.12.2020, whereby information was sought by him and, therefore, the exact contents of the application are not before this Court. However, it is discernible from the letter dated 03.02.2021 as well as from the impugned order and it is also conceded by the Appellant that he had sought information for grant of copies of compliance report filed by D.M., Ghaziabad in O.A. 177/2013 with M.A. 640/2015.

4. Learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the ground of availability of a remedy of appeal to the Appellant against the rejection by Deputy Registrar, NGT, as an alternate statutory remedy. It is a settled principle of law that a writ petition shall not ordinarily be entertained if there is an alternate efficacious remedy available to a party and the principle applies with a greater vigour where the alternate remedy is a statutory remedy. We find no infirmity with the impugned order and are in complete agreement with the observations of the learned Single Judge that a writ petition will not be maintainable in view of remedy of appeal available with the Appellant. The learned Single Judge has granted liberty to the Appellant to prefer an Appeal before the Competent Authority, in accordance with law and, therefore, no prejudice has been caused to the Appellant.

5. In view of the aforesaid, there is no merit in the appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. It is open to the Appellant to take recourse to alternate remedies available to him, in the appropriate Forum, in accordance with law, to seek the desired information.

CHIEF JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH, J SEPTEMBER 14, 2021