1 2025:CGHC:49014 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5091 of 2025 1 - Nitin Singhvi S/o Late N.C. Singhvi Aged About 60 Years R/o M I G 59 Sector - 1, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Distt- Raipur C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Central Information Commission Through - Chief Information Commissioner/information Commissioner Of Central Information Commission, C I C Bhawan, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka Delhi- 110067. 2 - First Appeal Officer Cum Registrar, Wildlife Institute Of India, (Wii), Dehradun, Uttarakhand. 3 - Central Public Information Officer, Wildlife Institute Of India, (Wii), Dehradun, Uttarakhand. 4 - Public Information Officer, Wildlife Institute Of India, (Wii), Dehradun, Uttarakhand. 5 - The Union Of India Through Secretary, Ministry Of Environment, Forest And Climate Change, 6th Floor, Vayu Wing, Indira Paryawaran Bhawan, Jore Bag Road, Aliganj, New Delhi 110003. ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Sajal Kumar Gupta, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Satish Gupta, G.A. For Respondent-UOI : Ms. Anmol Sharma, CGC Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 24/09/2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking following relief:- Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.10.08 12:07:00 +0530 2 1 Hon'ble Court may be kind and gracious enough to call for the records of the case from the respondents. 2. Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the impugned order dated 14.05.2025 passed by the Chief Information Commissioner/Information Commissioner of Central Information Commission in File No. CIC/WLIOI/A/2024/111414; 3. Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the impugned order dated 01.03.2024 passed by the Registrar and First Appellate Authority, Registration no. WII/RTI/APPEAL/2023-22/24; 4. Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the Impugned memo dated 09.01.2024 provided by the Central Public Information officer in RTI Application Registration No. WII/RTI/CPIO/2023-24 (Qtr-3)/108; 5. Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to provide sought information regarding the copies of license granted to WII in regards to holding of Narcotics drus in RTI application dated 08.12.2023; 6. Any other relief/relief's which Hon'ble court may deem fit in the fact s and circumstances of the instant case. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner sought information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI) on 08.12.2023, regarding the petitioner filed an RTI application seeking copies of licenses issued to the Wildlife Institute of India (WII), Dehradun, for possession of Etorphine Drug from the first issuance till FY 2023-2024. The CPIO, in its reply dated 09.01.2024, acknowledged the existence of the information but directed the petitioner to visit the Institute physically, citing the sensitive nature of the data. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a First Appeal on 14.01.2024, asserting that the refusal did not fall under the exemptions listed in Section 8(1) of the RTI Act. The FAA, 3 however, upheld the CPIO's stance in its order dated 01.03.2024 without applying mind or providing valid reasoning. A Second Appeal was filed before the CIC on 20.03.2024, again emphasizing that the denial of information was arbitrary and legally untenable. The CIC dismissed the appeal on 14.05.2025, holding that no further intervention was warranted and terming the information as sensitive. The petitioner contends that the conduct of the CPIO, FAA, and CIC is arbitrary, devoid of reasoned orders, and violative of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner asserts a larger public interest in accessing the information to bring alleged violations of the narcotic licence conditions to the notice of competent authorities. Hence, the present writ petition challenges the impugned orders dated 09.01.2024, 01.03.2024, and 14.05.2025, and seeks appropriate reliefs from the Hon'ble Court. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submit that in Second Appeal, the respondent No. 1 has rightly passed the order dated 14.05.2025 which warrants no interference. 4. I have learned counsel for the parties and perused the order dated 14.05.2025 passed by the Chief Information Commissioner. 5. From perusal of the order dated 14.05.2025 of the Central Information Commission, it transpires the fact that the requisite information/factual position in the matter has already been provided to the Appellant as per his RTI applications and as per the provisions of the RTI Act. The CPIO is only a communicator of information based on the records held in the office and hence, he is not expected to create information as per the desire of the 4 Appellant. Further, the information which is sensitive in nature cannot be directed to be disclosed under the RTI Act. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the information which the petitioner has sought for, has already been provided as per his RTI application and as per the provision of the RTI Act, therefore, prima facie, it appears no jurisdictional error committed by the Central Information Commission. Therefore, there is no good ground to entertain this petition. Accordingly the present writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti