1 2025:CGHC:32203 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3554 of 2025 Mahendra Pal Padwar S/o Late Shri C.L. Padwar Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Lakhanpur, Tehsil Lakhanpur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2-Collector Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh 3-District Education Officer Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh 4 - Tehsildar Lakhanpur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh 5 - Shri Rakesh Kumar Rajak S/o Deenbandhu Rajak Aged About 55 Years Working As Head Master, Government Primary School, Ashram Devtikra, Udaypur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh 6 - Shri Ramsuddin Sahu S/o Late Ganpat Sahu Aged About 56 Years R/o Mathpara, Bilaspur Chowk, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Shriya Jaiswal, Advocate For State : Mrs. Poorva Trivedi, panel lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 11.07.2025 1) By way of this petition, the petitioner is seeking the following reliefs:- “10.1 Call for the entire records of the case pertaining to the complaint made by the Petitioner 10.2 Issue writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) in the appropriate nature directing respondent no. 3 and 4 to take action on the complaint made by the petitioner dated 12.09.2023 within a period of 60 days; 10.3 Grant any other relief that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.” ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.07.15 17:13:25 +0530 2 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Patwari/respondent no. 6 has committed grave illegality in issuing income certificate without checking the authenticity of the income documents provided by the respondent no. 5. That the respondent no. 5 has got income certificate of relatively less amount in order to wrongfully take benefit under the RTE Act for which he or his children were otherwise not entitled. She submits that the respondent no. 5 and 6 have committed offences punishable under Section 420,120-B, 467, 468, 471 and 43 of IPC. 3) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the relief sought by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4) I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties, and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 5) On bare perusal of the record available, it is pertinent to mention here that the petitioner has filed a complaint against respondent no. 5, before the Respondent no. 3/District Education Officer, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh stating therein that the respondent no. 5 has tried to hide his actual income(less than the actual) with the aid of Patwari/respondent no. 6. Thereafter, the respondent no. 3 forwarded the complaint matter to the respondent no. 4/Tehsildar to investigate the complaint. Thereafter, he sought information under the Right to Information Act from respondent no. 4. But no information was provided to him, and because of which he preferred a First Appeal under RTI Act before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Udaypur, District Surguja, which too was of no avail. Hence he file the present petition seeking immediate action on the complaint made by him on 12.09.2023 within a period of 60 days. 6) Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and specially to the fact that the respondent no. 5 is a Govt. Employee working on the post of Head Master in Govt. Primary School, Chhuibhavna, Block Lakhanpur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, therefore, there is no chance that he may hide his total annual income. Therefore, the present petition seems to be baseless and devoid of any good ground on which it should be 3 entertained. Hence the present petition deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. 7) Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed. sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) alfiza JUDGE