Judgment :- 1. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent to furnish the documents to the petitioner in F.No.OCA/MDS/88 passed by the competent authority, SAFEMA (POP) AND NDPS ACT. 2. The petitioner's request for supply of the documents under the Right to Information Act stands declined on the ground that the data sought for by the petitioner related to the property, which was forfeited under the proceedings of Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976, which does not have any relationship with any public activity and therefore, there is no right with the petitioner to seek the information, under the Right to Information Act. 3. The petitioner, even otherwise, has no right to seek information or seek writ of mandamus for direction to the respondent to supply the orders passed under the Act, where he is not a party. If the petitioner has purchased the property then he has an independent right. The remedy of the petitioner is somewhere else, but not to seek a direction for supply of documents. 4. Furthermore, it may be noticed, that the aggrieved party already challenged the impugned order, in a quasi judicial proceedings, and as per the admission of the petitioner, the appeal stands partly allowed. The document, being a order of a quasi judicial authority, can always be obtained by moving appropriate application being open to public. The petitioner does not have any locus standi to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court, to seek a direction to the respondent to supply the documents or the proceedings, in which the petitioner is not a party. This Court is not a forum to collect papers or documents, nor the respondents are under any legal obligation to supply the documents asked for. 5. Finding no merit in this writ petition, it is ordered to be dismissed . No costs.