1 2025:CGHC:20312 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2047 of 2025 1 - Sanjay Shukla S/o Late Shri Ram Gopal Shukla Aged About 58 Years R/o Mig-1, Sector-3, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Chhattisgarh State Information Commission Through The Secretary, Sector- 19, North Block, New Raipur, Atal Nagar District Raipur (C.G.). 2 - Public Information Officer / Sub Divisional Officer Revenue / Land Acquisition Officer, Abhanpur, District- Raipur (C.G.). 3 - Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum Land Acquisition Officer Abhanpur, District- Raipur (C.G.). 4 - Tahsildar Cum Public Information Officer Abhanpur, District- Raipur (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kashish Saluja, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Harsh Wardhan, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 02/05/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records pertaining to the case of petitioner, in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 22.07.2024 passed by respondent no. 1 and further be pleased to direct the respondents, to provide the information requested by the petitioner under the RTI Act, 2005, within stipulated period and also impose cost upon responsible authorities, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has 3 filed Second Appeal before the Chhattisgarh State Information Commission way back on 24.04.2023 and the said appeal was adjourned by respondent No. 1 for hearing fixing on 15.01.2026 which is a violation of Section 7 (1) (3 a), 19 (6) & 25 of the Right to Information Act, 2005. Hence, this petition. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 submits that if the petitioner appear before the Commissioner he will give some short date and decide the same. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Pursuant to order dated 25.04.2025, Mr. Alok Chandravanshi, Commissioner, is present before this Court today. 6. His presence be marked. 7. The concerned Commissioner submits that due to paucity of Information Commissioners there is huge pendency of the cases and as such he has passed the said order in which next date was given on 15.01.2026. He further submits that due to inadvertent mistake such long date has been given. He further submits that in future he will take care that an unnecessary orders may not be passed. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Commissioner on 15th May, 2025 and on that day the concerned Commissioner shall 4 give a date to the petitioner and to decide the same within a period of 3 months. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat