KARAM CHAND PRAJAPATI v. Chhattisgarh State Information Commission
WPC/1509/2025 · 2025-03-24
Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 14305 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 14305 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2025:CGHC:13974
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1509 of 2025 Karam Chand Prajapati R/o Sanjay Muraka Gali Koraba Tahsil Korba Distt Korba (C.G.)
... Petitioner versus 1 - Chhattisgarh State Information Commission Through Secretary Sector-19 North Block Atal Nagar Nava Raipur Distt Raipur C.G. 2 - First Appellate Authority Office Of Collector Korba Distt Korba (C.G.) 3 - Assistant Public Information Officer At Office Of Collector Distt Korba C.G. 4 - Public Works Department Korba Distt Korba C.G.
... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Shyam Sunder Lal Tekchandani, Advocate For Respondents No.2 to 4 : Ms. Nupoor Sonkar, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge
Order on Board 24.03.2025 1 Heard Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shyam Sunder Lal Tekchandani, learned counsel YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.03.25 10:28:18 +0530
2 appearing for respondent No.1 and Ms. Nupoor Sonkar, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondents No.2 to 4. 2 The petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):-
“10.1 That, it is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble High court may kindly be pleased to issue order or direction to the respondent no 4 to provide the information to the petitioner free of cost as required by him in his appeals and be taken legal action against the respondent authority under the provisions of the Right to Information Act 2005 in the interest of justice. 10.2 Any other relief may also be granted to the Petitioner. which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in facts and circumstances of the case.” 3
Learned counsel for the petitioner has made a limited prayer that respondent No.1 may be directed to decide/dispose off his second appeal within a specific time frame, to which, learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that the second appeal preferred by the petitioner will be decided expeditiously. 4 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, the submission advanced by the learned counsel for respondent
3 No.1, instant petition is disposed of giving a direction to respondent No.1 to consider and decide the second appeal preferred by the petitioner expeditiously preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of production of certified copy of this
order.
Sd/- -
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge Yogesh