1 2025:CGHC:51039 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5263 of 2025 Krishna Devi Nag D/o Shri Babulal Nag Aged About 46 Years R/o 271, Ward No. 26, Near Sahu Ata Chakki, Santra Badi Durg, District- Durg Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus Public Information Officer Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission North Block, Sector 19, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shikhar Bhaktiyar, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gary Mukhopadhyay, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 14/10/2025 1. With the consent of the parties, heard finally. 2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition on the following reliefs: “10.1. That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction commanding the respondent authority to forthwith comply with the order dated 30.07.2025 passed by the First Appellate Authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005 and to supply to the 2 petitioner the complete copy of her evaluated answer sheet of the Civil Judge (Mains) Examination, 2022, including the missing first page containing her roll number, center details, signatures and marks awarded for each question; 10.2 That any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper may also be granted in favor of the petitioner safeguarding their interest.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner appeared in the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Main Examination, 2023 conducted by the respondent authority. Following the examination, on 08.05.2025, the petitioner submitted an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 requesting a certified copy of her evaluated answer sheet. In response, the respondent authority, vide letter dated 12.06.2025, provided the petitioner with a copy of her answer sheet; however, the same was incomplete as the first page was missing. Since the first page of the evaluated answer sheet is crucial in showing the petitioner’s particulars (roll number, center code, signatures) and, most importantly, the marks awarded question-wise, the incomplete supply of information prejudiced her rights under the RTI Act. Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred a First Appeal under Section 19(1) of the Act. The Appellate Authority by its order dated 3 30.07.2025, allowed the appeal and directed the respondent authority to provide the petitioner with the first page of her answer sheet. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent provided a copy of the letter dated 09.10.2025 which says that in compliance of the order dated 30.07.2025 passed in First Appeal No. 88/64/Appeal/2025, the first page of evaluated answer sheet of the petitioner containing her roll number, signature, time of paper, seal of center, etc in her handwriting has been provided to the petitioner. 5. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties at length and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. The document presented by the counsel for the respondent is taken on record. 7. Therefore, it is crystal clear that the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed by the respondent. 8. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner that the petitioner may approach the competent authority in case the petitioner’s grievance has not been redressed. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima