The Tamil Nadu Information Commission came to the rescue of a widow whose petition to include her late husband’s name in a property document was ignored by revenue officials in the Nilgiris district.
When the woman filed a petition under the Right to Information Act seeking to know how the name of A. Raju, her husband’s brother, was entered in the revenue record pertaining to the property while her petition was kept pending, the Public Information Officer refused to provide details, stating that she was a “third party”.
The case relates to the petition of B. Jyothi, wife of Rangan, a resident of Kothagiri in the Nilgiris district. While no action was taken on her petition seeking to include her late husband’s name in a property document for more than one year, she came to know that her brother-in-law’s name was entered into the revenue records.
The Deputy Tahsildar/PIO refused to share any information when she questioned how Mr. Raju’s name got into the property records.
Aggrieved over the denial of information and not convinced with the reply of the First Appellate Authority, the woman moved the Tamil Nadu Information Commission seeking relief.
The PIO, who appeared for the enquiry, told the Commission that the name of the petitioner’s husband was deleted from the records by “mistake” and it was possible to include them in the document now.
Passing orders after hearing both sides, State Information Commissioner R. Pratapkumar directed the public authority to include the name of the petitioner’s husband in the property document and send her a copy by registered post.
He also instructed the PIO to explain why a maximum penalty of ₹25,000 should not be levied and disciplinary action taken against him for dereliction of duty under the Act.
