The Allahabad High Court has come down heavily on a petitioner who kept flooding the court registry with RTI applications instead of arguing his case. Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery dismissed the writ petition and imposed a total cost of Rs 6,70,000 on the petitioner, Vemula Venkata Vinay Babu alias Vinay Vemula, for what the court called a deliberate attempt to disrupt court proceedings.
Background of the Case
The petitioner had originally challenged an order passed by the Commissioner, State Information Commission, U.P., Lucknow, dated July 28, 2023. His RTI application, filed back in November 2022, sought details about a complaint made against him to the women's helpline and cyber cell in Gorakhpur. The Commission had rejected his appeal, holding that the information had already been sent to him by registered post in January 2023.
The petitioner, who had earlier engaged an advocate, later chose to appear in person and insisted on joining hearings only through video conferencing, calling it his fundamental right.
Court's Observations
The bench rejected that claim outright. It noted that video conferencing is a matter of convenience granted at the court's discretion, not an absolute right, and pointed out that despite a clear direction to appear physically, the petitioner kept showing up only through video link.
The order also flagged a troubling pattern. According to a report from the Deputy Registrar (RTI), the petitioner filed 24 RTI applications between June and July 2026 alone, asking for things like internal office note sheets, server backend logs, and Bench Secretary attendance registers none of which had anything to do with his actual case.
The bench observed that such applications had "caused hindrance in administration of justice" and that the petitioner had "ample time to file various applications under Right to Information Act but to appear before this Court and argue the case on merit."
The court also noted that the petitioner had earlier filed a plea seeking punishment against three respondents for allegedly not filing a counter affidavit a claim the bench found factually incorrect since the relevant reply had already been submitted and served on him well in time. That application was dismissed with a cost of Rs 50,000.
Separately, the court referred to a report on record indicating the petitioner had been troubling a woman and her daughter who had earlier lodged a complaint against him, and that the information sought had already been supplied to him.
Decision
On merits, the court found that the information the petitioner wanted had already been furnished by the authorities, and there was no reason to interfere with the Commission's order. The writ petition was dismissed.
Along with the earlier cost of Rs 50,000 and Rs 1,20,000 imposed for the 24 RTI applications, the court added a further Rs 5,00,000, taking the total to Rs 6,70,000.
The amount has to be deposited in the High Court Legal Services Committee's account within four weeks, failing which the Registrar General was directed to take appropriate steps.
Case Details
Case Title: Vemula Venkata Vinay Babu Alias Vinay Vemula v. State of U.P. and 3 Others
Case Number: Writ - C No. 547 of 2024
Judge: Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
Decision Date: August 5, 2026
 chief. Eknath Shinde – Shiv Sena leader-300x169.webp)
