ASHISH KUMAR PANDEY v. CHHATTISGARH STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION
WPC/3688/2025 · 2025-07-16
Shri Arvind Kumar Verma
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 35017 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 35017 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2025:CGHC:33591
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3688 of 2025 1 - Ashish Kumar Pandey S/o Shri Vijay Kumar Pandey Aged About 35 Years R/o Quarter No. 15/a, Road 24, Sector 07, P.S.- Bhilai Nagar, Distt.- Durg (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Chhattisgarh State Information Commission Through Its Secretary Sector-19, North Block, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - First Appellate Officer Deputy Superintendent Of Police (Iucaw) Bhilai, Distt.- Durg (C.G.) 3 - Public Information Officer Police Station - Bhilai Thana, Sector-06, Bhilai, Distt.- Durg (C.G.) ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent No. 1
: Mr. Shyam Sunder Lal Tekchandani, Adv Hon’ble Shri
Arvind Kumar Verma
Order on Board 17/07/2025
1.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is seeking direction from this Court against the arbitrary action of the respondent No. 1, whereby the respondent No. 1 has not assigned any date for first hearing in complaint No. C/2973/2025 Durg under Right to Information Act, 2005 preferred by the petitioner, which is pending consideration and Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.07.17 18:16:13 +0530
2 also seeking direction to direct the respondent No. 1 to decide the complaint preferred by the petitioner within a time bound period.
2.
Learned counsel for respondent No. 1 submits that in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner seeking direction to respondent No. 1 to consider the pending complaint, he is having no objection to the limited prayer and if the complaint of the petitioner is pending, it will be considered in accordance with law within a period of two months.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case instead of keeping this petition pending, I find it appropriate to dispose of the same at this stage directing the respondent No. 1 to consider/decide the pending complaint No. C/2973/2025/Durg dated 02.05.2025 preferred the petitioner on 29.04.2025 on its own merits and in accordance with law within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not observed anything on the merits of the case.
6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/-
(Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti