1 2026:CGHC:26197 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3061 of 2026 1 - Ramdulari Sahu S/o Badri Prasad Sahu Aged About 40 Years Resident Of Budhwari Mohalla, Korba Tahsil And District- Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Right To Information Commission Through Secretary Sector -19, North Block- Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Chief Infromation Commissioner State Information Commission Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Korba District- Korba Chhattisgarh 4 - Appellate Authority And Authorized Superintendent Engineer Municipal Corporation Nagar Nigam Korba District- Korba Chhattisgarh, 5 - Appellate Authority Office Of Municipal Corporation Nagar, Nigam (Saket Bhawan) Korba District- Korba Chhattisgarh 6 - Public Information Officer Municipal Corporation Nagar Nigam Korba, District- Korba Chhattisgarh, ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Kumar Jogi, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State Information Commission : Mr. Shayam Sunder Lal Tekchandani, Advocate. RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 For Respondent/State : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 29/06/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “(i) It is therefore prayed that the Hon'ble High Court may kindly be pleased to issue, order, or direction to the respondent authorities to decide pending second appeal dated 30.01.2025 (annexure P-1) and to provide the information to the petitioner as required in his application at the earliest, in the interest of justice. (ii) To grant any other relief deemed fit and proper by the Hon'ble High Court in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the State Information Commission raises a preliminary objection and submits that the petitioner has not preferred the second appeal in the prescribed format as required under the relevant provisions of law. Instead, the petitioner has merely submitted an application, which cannot be treated as a valid second appeal. It is, therefore, contended that unless an appropriate second appeal is filed in the prescribed format before the competent Second Appellate Authority, the same cannot be entertained or adjudicated upon in accordance with law. 3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to file 3 an appropriate second appeal in the prescribed format before the competent Second Appellate Authority. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to permit the petitioner to withdraw the present writ petition with the aforesaid liberty. 6. It is further directed that in the event such second appeal is filed within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, the Second Appellate Authority shall entertain and consider the same without raising the objection of limitation and shall decide the appeal expeditiously, strictly in accordance with law. While doing so, the authority shall also take into consideration the fact that the petitioner had earlier approached the appellate forum by filing a second appeal on 30.01.2025, though the same was not in the prescribed format, and shall pass an appropriate reasoned and speaking order on its own merits. 7. With this observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat