Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Bheemacharya Balacharya Varakhedakar, filed a writ petition challenging three orders passed by the trial court at Pandharpur. The first order (Exhibit 216) rejected his prayer to exhibit original public documents produced by the Charity Commissioner and for certified copies thereof. The second order (Exhibit 217) rejected his request to make his own photocopies of certain documents with a court peon appointed at his expense. The third order (Day Application No.614 of 2009) rejected his request for certified copies of correspondence between the trial court and the High Court regarding extension of time for disposal of the suit. The High Court had directed the trial court to decide the suit within a specified time, but the trial court sought extension, which was granted. The petitioner applied for certified copies of that correspondence, but the trial court refused on the ground that the civil manual had no provision for such copies. The High Court noted that after the civil manual was published, the Right to Information Act, 2005 was enacted, and it was not disputed that if the petitioner applied under RTI, he would be entitled to such copies. Therefore, the High Court held that the petitioner ought to be granted certified copies without technical refusal, and allowed the Day Application. Regarding Exhibit 217, the High Court held that no person can be allowed to take court records out of the court room for photocopying, but noted that a photocopying machine is available in the court office at Pandharpur, implying that copies could be made there. The petition was partly allowed, with the order on Day Application set aside and the trial court directed to grant certified copies of the correspondence. The other two orders were upheld.
Headnote
A) Right to Information - Certified Copies - Right to Information Act, 2005 - Petitioner sought certified copies of correspondence between trial court and High Court regarding extension of time for suit disposal - Trial court rejected citing no provision in civil manual - Held that since copies would be available under RTI Act, they should be granted without technical refusal (Paras 4-5). B) Civil Procedure - Court Records - Photocopying - Petitioner sought permission to make his own photocopies of documents - Held that no person can be allowed to take court records out of the court room for photocopying or otherwise (Para 6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a litigant is entitled to certified copies of correspondence between trial court and High Court regarding extension of time for suit disposal, and whether a litigant can be allowed to make photocopies of court documents himself.
Final Decision
Petition partly allowed. Order on Day Application No.614 of 2009 set aside; trial court directed to grant certified copies of the correspondence. Orders below Exhibit 216 and Exhibit 217 upheld.
Law Points
- Right to Information Act
- 2005 overrides procedural manual
- certified copies of court correspondence must be granted if available under RTI
- no person can take court records out for photocopying
