IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 16.02.2026 Coram:

The Honourable Mr.Justice V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN W.P.No.4121 of 2026 M.Adhimoolam ...Petitioner Versus

1.The Chief Information Commissioner, RTI Commission, Central Information Commission, CIC Bhavan, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi – 110 067.

2.Tmt.P.Ragini General Manager cum 2nd Appellate Authority, (Administration), PIPDIC, No.60, Romain Rolland Street, Puducherry.

3.Thiru.P.T.Rudra Goud, Managing Director cum First Appellate Authority, PIPDIC, No.60, Romain Rolland Street, Puducherry – 605 001.

4.The Public Information Officer, The Managing Director, PIPDIC, No.60, Romain Rolland Street, Puducherry – 605 001.

...Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus to furnish the documents under the RTI Act Application date on 24.11.2023 subsequently the respondents 2 to 4 has not furnished information within the time specified under Section 7(1) of the RTI Act and consequently, to impose penalty under Section 20 of the RTI Act to the above respondents 2 to 4.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Maharajan For Respondent – 1 : Ms.Sangeetha for Mr.Venkatasamy Babu, Central Govt. Standing Counsel For Respondents – 2 to 4 : Mr.P.Dinesh for Mr.D.Ravichander

ORDER

The petitioner, vide Application dated 24.11.2023, requested the copy of 10 loan documents from the 4^th respondent. The 4^th respondent vide Reply dated 09.01.2024, furnished the documents sought by the petitioner. However, the petitioner was not satisfied with the reply sent by the 4^th respondent. Hence, the petitioner filed a First Appeal before the 3^rd respondent. The said First Appeal was disposed of on 23.02.2024. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a Second Appeal before the 1^st respondent. The 1^st respondent, vide Order dated 19.09.2025 bearing File No.CIC/UTPON/A/2024/110731, directed the 4^th respondent to furnish the information sought by the petitioner as per the records available with them, with respect to Point No.3 & Point No.10, within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of the order. Despite the said directions, the 4^th respondent did not furnish the information sought by the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

2. When this matter came up on 11.02.2026, Mr.Venkatasamy Babu, learned Central Government Standing Counsel took notice on behalf of 1^st respondent and Ms.V.Usha, learned Additional Government Pleader (Puducherry) took notice on behalf of respondents 2 to 4. The learned Additional Government Pleader (Puducherry) made a statement that the information sought by the petitioner will be furnished by 16.02.2026 i.e., today. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed on 16.02.2026.

3. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, Mr.P.Dinesh, learned counsel representing Mr.D.Ravichander for respondents 2 to 4, submitted that the information which were sought by the petitioner had been furnished much earlier. The information sought by the petitioner with respect to Point No.3 & Point No.10 are as follows:

Point No.3 : Copy of equitable mortgaged deed Point No.10: 2^nd Loan Working Capital Statement of Account No.03A06 from 18.05.1999 till 24.11.2023.

4. Though the information had already been furnished, today, Mr.P.Dinesh has furnished the Statement of Accounts, which ends with 31.12.2023 to Mr.V.Maharajan, learned counsel for petitioner. This satisfies the information sought by the petitioner in Point No.10. Insofar as the information sought by the petitioner in Point No.3 is concerned, Mr.P.Dinesh states that he will share the equitable mortgage deed with the petitioner by the end of the day.

5. Since the 4^th respondent has complied the Order dated 19.09.2025 passed by 1^st respondent in entirety, this Writ Petition stands closed. No costs.

16.02.2026 mrr Index: Yes/No Speaking Order (or) Non-Speaking Order To

1.The Chief Information Commissioner, RTI Commission, Central Information Commission, CIC Bhavan, Baba Gangnath