Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:7010-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 74 of 2025 Petitioner :- Chandra Pal Verma Respondent :- State Information Commission U.P. Thru. Registrar Lko. Counsel for Petitioner :- Lohitaksha Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- Shikhar Anand Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shikhar Anand, learned counsel who has put in appearance on behalf of the State Information Commission. 2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition in public interest stating in paragraph 5 of the writ petition that the questions raised in the present writ petition are important questions of law and there is no authoritative pronouncement on any matter raised in this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the opposite party has pointed out that the statement made in the writ petition is patently false for the reason that several orders have come to be passed by this Court on the premise of a judgment rendered by the Apex court in the case of Kishan Chand Jain versus Union of India and others reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1334. 4. The judgment rendered by the Apex court relates to the issue of e-filing wherein the question involved in the writ petition has been set at rest. The relevant portion of the Apex Court order reads as under :- “24. That apart, there can be no gainsaying the fact that e-filing provides round the clock access to courts, and in the process, facilitates the convenience of lawyers and litigants. We direct that all SICs must ensure that e-filing of complaints and appeals is provided in a streamlined manner to every litigant. Steps should also be taken having regard to the provisions of Section 26 of the RTI Act to ensure that service is effected on the Public Information Officers through the electronic mode. This shall also be implemented by 31 December 2023”. 5. A further order passed by this Court in Misc. Bench No. 26970 of 2016 has also come to be placed before us which has upheld the government order dated 14.9.2016 regarding which an incidental issue raised by the petitioner in the present writ petion has been answered. 6. In nutshell, the petitioner has not undertaken any research regarding various reliefs sought in the present writ petition. This practice is unhealthy and does not instill confidence either in the submissions or the pleadings set up. This Court is not a forum to be invoked by concealment of facts or making any misrepresentation. 7. We would have proceeded to impose heavy cost upon the petitioner but learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that he shall warn the petitioner to be careful in future. 8. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. [Subhash Vidyarthi,J.] [Attau Rahman Masoodi, J.] Order Date :- 4.2.2025 kanhaiya Digitally signed by :- KANHAIYA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench