K. Chandru, J.

1. Heard Mr. C. Prakasam, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs. Bhavani Subbaroyan, learned Additional Government Pleader representing the first respondent and perused the records.

2. The petitioner is a salesman in the second respondent Bank and has filed the present writ petition against the direction given by the Deputy Registrar (first respondent) to the second respondent to furnish the information sought for by the third respondent. According to the petitioner, the third respondent's son was a member of the Marxist Party and was sending petitions to the higher officials as the petitioner had denied mamool to be given to him frequently. The said person, by name, Thirumoorthy, had sought for certain information under the Right to Information Act [for short, 'RTI Act']. On the basis of the request made by him, the said person was directed to pay Rs. 25,405/- towards the cost of furnishing the said information in terms of the Right to Information (Regulation of Fees and Cost) Rules, 2005. The said Thirumoorthy did not pursue his request. But, on the contrary, set up his mother the third respondent for getting the information, which was earlier sou