1 CGHC010349862026 2026:CGHC:42057-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 912 of 2026 Santosh Kumar Shriwas S/o Shri Krishna Kumar Shriwas Aged About 29 Years R/o House No. 153, Shivansh Sadan, Ward No. 18, Shiv Mandir Road, Khairagarh, Police Station-Khairagarh, District- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.), Presently Working As Stenographer, Indira Kala Sangeet Vishwavidyalaya, Khairagarh, District-Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) ... Appellant versus 1 - Ku. Bhuneshwari D/o Shri Madan Singh Thakur Aged About 32 Years Working As Stenographer, Indira Kala Sangeet Vishwavidyalaya, Khairagarh, District- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Higher Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar (C.G.) 3 - Indira Kala Sangeet Vishwavidyalaya, Khairagarh, Through Its Registrar, District- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) ... Respondents For Appellant : Mr.Gautam Khetrapal, Advocate For Respondent No.1 For Respondent No.2/State For Respondent No.3 : : : Mr.Siddharth Pandey, Advocate Ms.Anuja Sharma, Deputy Government Advocate Ms.Nirupama Bajpai, Advocate BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Digitally signed by BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Date: 2026.09.29 10:23:06 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Krushna Ram Mohapatra, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Santosh Sharma, Judge Judgment on Board Per Krushna Ram Mohapatra , Chief Justice 28.09.2026 1. Heard Mr.Gautam Khetrapal, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Siddharth Pandey, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1, Ms.Anuja Sharma, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.2/State and Ms.Nirupama Bajpai, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3. 2. This writ appeal has been filed assailing the order dated 10.07.2026 passed by learned Single Judge in WPS No. 4204/2020 (Annexure A-1), whereby the writ petition filed by respondent No. 1 (writ petitioner therein) has been allowed. 3. Respondent No. 2 in the writ petition is the appellant in the present writ appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant, in the course of argument, submits that some documents which are relevant for adjudication of the case were not available with the appellant during the pendency of the writ petition. Although the appellant had made an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005, but the same were not made available to him at the relevant stage. After disposal of the writ petition, he was supplied with the documents which are annexed to the writ appeal as Annexure A-7 and A-8. 3 He, therefore, prays for withdrawal of the writ appeal to file a properly constituted review petition before learned Single Judge for consideration of those documents. 5. Learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 do not have any objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant. 6. In view of the above, the writ appeal is disposed of with an observation that if a properly constituted review petition is filed, the same may be considered in accordance with law. Sd/- Sd/- Sd (Santosh Sharma) (Krushna Ram Mohapatra) Judge Chief Justice Bablu