1 2025:CGHC:11016 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1230 of 2025 1 - Rupesh Kumar Verma S/o Shri Balbhadra Singh Verma Aged About 42 Years R/o Ward No. 6, Mahamaya Para, Shanti Nagar, Bhilai-3, Bhilai Charoda, Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - C.G. State Information Commission Through Its Commissioner Sector- 19, North Block, Atal Nagar, District-Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Commissioner C.G. State Information Commission, Sector-19, North Block, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Municipal Corporation Durg Through Its Commissioner Municipal Corporation Durg, District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent/State Information Commission : Shri S.S. Lal Tekchandani, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. Govt Advocate. SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2025.03.07 17:14:37 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board 06.03.2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction towards the respondent no. 1 to decide the case No. C/63/2023/Durg 59338, which is pending on the application filed by the petitioner on 17.10.2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent no. 3 is not providing the information as directed by the First Appellate Authority Municipal Corporation Durg and the said order was afÏrmed by the Commission in a second appeal dated 02.03.2021, for which the petitioner submitted a complaint before the State Information Commission about the public information ofÏcer who is not providing the information as sought by the petitioner, in spite of the order of the First Appellate Authority as well as the Commission itself. Though, the Commission has taken cognizance of the application, but on 10.10.2024 adjourned the matter for hearing on 10.02.2026, hence the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a direction towards the State Information Commission to decide the complaint filed by the petitioner within a stipulated period. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1 would submit that the complaint filed by the petitioner bearing no. C/63/2023/Durg/ 59338 will be considered in accordance with law within a stipulated period. 4. I have heard both the counsels for the parties. 3 5. In view of the submission made by the respondent no. 1, it is directed that the complaint filed by the bearing No. C/63/2023/Durg/ 59338 be decided within a period of 3 months from today. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Shoaib