Chhattisgarh High Court
WPC/1906/2021 of DEVASHISH RAI Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 25 September 2026
2026:CGHC:41910 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1906 of 2021 1 - Devashish Rai S/o Dinobandhu Rai Aged About 43 Years R/o Pakhanjur, New Market Ward No. 15, Ambedkar Ward, Post Office Pakhanjur, District Kanker Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh ...
CGHC010098322021
2026:CGHC:41910
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 1906 of 2021
1 - Devashish Rai S/o Dinobandhu Rai Aged About 43 Years R/o Pakhanjur, New Market Ward No. 15, Ambedkar Ward, Post Office Pakhanjur, District Kanker Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh
... Petitioner
Versus
1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Food And Civil Supplies Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
2 - The State Information Commission Sector - 19 North Block, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
3 - The District Food Officer District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh.
4 - The Secretary Gram Panchayat Gudum, Tahsil Durgkondal, District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh.
5 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Bhanupratappur, District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondents
(Cause title is downloaded from CIS Periphery.)
For Petitioner
:
Mr. D.N. Prajapati, Advocate.
For State
:
Ms. Akanksha Verma, P.L.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 26.09.2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The petitioner in the said writ petition has prayed for the following reliefs :- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby directing the respondent no. 3 to ensure supply of information to the petitioner and further be pleased to direct the respondents to take disciplinary action against the respondent no. 4 as enumerated under the provisions of Section 20 of Right to Information Act. 10.3 To kindly grant any other relief which may be deem fit in the given facts and circumstances of the instant case.”
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the First Appellate Authority, vide order dated 25.07.2018, had already directed the concerned Public Information Officer to furnish the information sought by the petitioner. He next submits that despite the said direction, the requisite information has not been furnished to the petitioner and, instead, the Second Appellate Authority, vide impugned order dated 03.10.2019, has passed an order contrary to the direction already issued by the
First Appellate Authority. He also submits that the impugned order dated 03.10.2019 is unsustainable in law and may accordingly be set aside, with a further direction to the concerned Public Information Officer to furnish the information sought by the petitioner in terms of the order dated 25.07.2018 passed by the First Appellate Authority.
3. Learned State counsel has not objection to the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds that the First Appellate Authority, vide order dated 25.07.2018, had already directed the concerned Public Information Officer to furnish the information sought by the petitioner. In view thereof, the subsequent order dated 03.10.2019 passed by the Second Appellate Authority cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and is, accordingly, set aside. In the interest of justice, the concerned Public Information Officer is directed to furnish the information sought by the petitioner in terms of the order dated 25.07.2018 passed by the First Appellate Authority. The petitioner shall submit an appropriate application before the concerned authority along with a copy of this order. Upon receipt of such application, the concerned authorities shall consider the same and ensure that the requisite information is furnished to the petitioner, in accordance with the direction of the First Appellate
Authority, within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the application.
5. With this observation and direction, the writ petitions stands disposed of.
6. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju