RUPESH KUMAR VERMA v. C.G. STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION
WPC/486/2026 · 2026-02-08
Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 128 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 128 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2026:CGHC:7031
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 486 of 2026 * - Rupesh Kumar Verma S/o Shri Balbhadra Singh Verma Aged About 42 Years R/o Ward No. 6, Mahamaya Para, Shanti Nagar, Bhilai-3, Bhilai Charoda, Durg Chhattisgarh
... Petitioner Versus 1 - C.G. State Information Commission Through Its Commissioner, Sector-19, North Block, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Commissioner C.G. State Information Commission, Sector-19, North Block, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Second Appellate Authority C.G. State Information Commission, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Directorate Of Town Administration And Development Through Its Director, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 5 - Public Information Officer Cum Joint Director Town Administration And Development Atal Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh
... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. T.R. Patel, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Sabyasachi Choubey, Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 09/02/2026
1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-
“10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue direction to the respondent no. 3 to conclude and decide the Case No. A/1291/2025, pending before it within a suitable time limit framed by this Hon’ble Court. Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.02.10 18:13:27 +0530
2 10.2 Any other consequential relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper and for which the petitioner is entitled, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.”
2. Mr. T.R. Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Second Appeal No. A/1291/2025 preferred before respondent No.3 is pending since 2025 and he would submit that a direction may be issued to respondent No. 3 to conclude it at the earliest.
3. On the other hand, Mr. Sabyasachi Choubey, learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State would oppose.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by Mr. T.R. Patel, this petition, at this juncture, is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 3 to make all endeavors to conclude the pending proceedings of Second Appeal No. A/1291/2025 at the earliest.
6. With the aforesaid direction, this petition is disposed of. Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
Judge vatti