Smt.Bulbul Agrawal v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 966 of 2014 Smt.Bulbul Agrawal W/o Shri Rohit Agrawal Aged About 37 Years Advocate, R/o Surajmukhi 58 Rajkishore Nagar, Bilaspur, CG ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Information Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Dist Raipur, CG

2. The Sub Public Information Officer, Nagar Panchayat Lailunga, Distt Raigarh, CG

3. The Public Information Officer, Nagar Panchayat Lailunga, Distt Raigarh, CG

4. The Chhattisgarh State Information Commission Near Nirmal Chhaya, Mira Datar Road, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Distt Raipur, CG ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Ms. Bulbul Agrawal, in person For Respondent 1/State :

Shri Satish Gupta, Govt. Advocate For Respondents No. 2 & 3 :

Shri N. Naha Roy, Advocate For Respondent No.4 :

Shri Shyam Tekchandani, Advocate Order On Board 10/09/2015 Heard.

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved by order dated 5.4.2014 passed by the Chhattisgarh State Information Commission.

2. The petitioner, who appears in person, submits that the petitioner had moved an application for supply of relevant information relating to note-sheets from 5.12.2011 to 25.1.2012 concerning removal of encroachment at Lailunga. A prayer was also made for supply of the relevant copies of attendance register showing attendance of the Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Lailunga. But the information with regard to note sheets was only supplied partly and the note-sheet after 23.12.2011 were not supplied. The respondents did not even supply the attendance register showing presence of CMO.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the records contained note sheets only up to 23.12.2011 and, thereafter, no note sheet was recorded. The note sheet

recorded up to 23.12.2011 were supplied to the petitioner. It is also submitted that attendance register does not record the attendance of CMO though it is an attendance register of all other employees working in the Nagar Panchayat.

4. I have gone through the original records/ minutes relating to removal of encroachment and the attendance register produced before this Court. The CMO of Nagar Panchayat is also present in the Court and he has produced the original records and attendance register. After going through the same, I find that the note sheets are only up to 23.12.2011 and no further note-sheets have been recorded. The attendance register produced in original shows that it does not record daily attendance of the CMO. Whether this kind of procedure is correct or not is not a matter for consideration in this proceedings. I am satisfied that the information, as sought by the petitioner, was supplied to the petitioner. The petitioner seems to have other grievance in the matter. For that, the petitioner has to take recourse to other remedy and not in this proceeding which is only confined to supply of information under the Right to Information Act.

5. The petition is therefore dismissed.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Praveen