Allahabad High Court

WRIC/9466/2026 of BRAJESH KUMAR Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHER on 7 October 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 9466 of 2026 Court No. - 36 HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J. 1. Heard Sri Himanshu Singh, learned counsel for petitioner and Mrs. Manjari Singh, learned counsel for respondents. 2. Petitioner has challenged the order dated 07.02.2024 after about two

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - C No. - 9466 of 2026

Court No. - 36

HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

1. Heard Sri Himanshu Singh, learned counsel for petitioner and Mrs. Manjari Singh, learned counsel for respondents.

2. Petitioner has challenged the order dated 07.02.2024 after about two years. Impugned order was passed in a second appeal under the provisions of Right to Information Act and for reference the same is reproduced hereinafter: "वाद पुकारा गया, पत्रावली प्रस्तुत हुई। अपीलकर्ता की ओर से उनके प्रतिनिधि श्री नवल किशोर शर्मा उपस्थित हुए। विपक्षी जनसूचनाधिकारी की ओर से उनके प्रतिनिधि श्री इसार हुसैन, अधिवक्ता उपस्थित हुए। पत्रावली के अवलोकन से पाया गया कि अपीलकर्ता को सूचनाएं न प्राप्त होने पर उसके द्वारा आयोग के समक्ष द्वितीय अपील योजित की गयी है। विपक्षी द्वारा बताया गया कि अपीलकर्ता को उसके मूल आवेदन पत्र के कम में वांछित सूचनाएं दिनांक 03.10.2023 को प्रेषित की जा चुकी है। विपक्षी द्वारा सूचनाओं की प्रति एवं सूचनाएं प्रेषित किये जाने का साक्ष्य प्रस्तुत किया गया, जिसे पत्रावली पर संलग्न किया गया है। अपीलकर्ता को उसके मूल आवेदन पत्र के कम में वांछित सूचनाएं उपलब्ध करायी गयी है। अब तक अपीलकर्ता द्वारा विपक्षी के कार्यलय में अपनी लिखित या मौखिक आपत्ति दर्ज नहीं करायी है इससे प्रतीत होता है कि अपीलकर्ता प्राप्त सूचनाओं से पूर्णतया सहगत है। ऐसे में प्रकरण की आयोग के समक्ष लंबित रखने का कोई औचित्य प्रतीत नहीं होता है। तद्नुसार वाद निस्तारित किया जाता है। Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Deepak Shukla, Himanshu Singh, Shreyansh Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Manjari Singh Brajesh Kumar .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Other .....Respondent(s)

पत्रावली दाखिल दफ्तर हो।"

3. After considering rival submissions, the Court finds that an opportunity can be granted to petitioner to submit objection, therefore, impugned order can be set aside.

4. Learned counsel for respondents submits that since impugned order was passed about 2 years ago and State Information Commission does not keep record of matters older than one year in terms of a circular, therefore, it would be appropriate that petitioner may file a fresh second appeal.

5. In view of above, impugned order dated 07.02.2024 is hereby set aside and liberty is granted to petitioner to file a fresh second appeal alongwith record available with him. A fresh second appeal be filed within three weeks from today.

6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. October 8, 2026 AK WRIC No. 9466 of 2026 2 (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.) Digitally signed by :- AWADESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead