1 / 2 CGHC010021972021 2026:CGHC:30418 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 645 of 2021 • Dharmchand Parakh S/o Late Kanwarlal Parakh Aged About 62 Years R/o Ward No. 46, C/o Yashwant Sahu Mangalbhavan, Gali No. 2, Kodikhana Road, Kabir Sadan, Basantpur, Rajnandgaon, Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1. The Central Information Commissioner Central Information Commission, New Delhi. 2. The Chief Information Commissioner Chhattisgarh Information Commission, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3. The First Appellate Public Information Authority Office Of Zila Panchayat, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. 4. The Public Information Officer Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Services Department District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Love Kumar Ramteke, Advocate through VC mode. For Respondent No. 2 For Respondent No. 3 & 4 : : Mr. Shyam Sundar Lal Tekchandani, Adv. Mr. Raj Kumar Sahu, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 17/07/2026 1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the information sought for by the petitioner has been supplied on 15.07.2026 and thereby there is delay of about 06 years in supplying the information. 2. Learned counsel for the respective respondents would submit that from the order impugned, Annexure P-1, it is clearly reflecting that the information is supplied to the petitioner on 29.11.2015 and there is an endorsement in this PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 2 regard. However, respondent No. 2 while considering second appeal directed that the information supplied is not paginated and has directed to supply information under paging. 3. In the aforementioned facts of the case, it is not a case where the information as sought by the applicant/ petitioner has not been supplied but there is only error of no pagination of the information, no other objection is raised. 4. In the aforementioned facts of the case, in the opinion of this Court, the information as sought for by the petitioner has been duly supplied and therefore nothing remains in this writ petition for adjudication. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to cost. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE