Neetesh Kumar Shah v. C.G. Information Commission And ORS.
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WP (C) No. 3987 of 2010 Neetesh Kumar Shah S/o Late Ravindra Kumar Shah, Aged about 42 years, R/o Daroga Para, Raipur, Distt.Raipur (CG) ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Chhattisgarh State Information Commission, through its Secretary, Nirmal Chhaya Bhavan, Meera Datar Road, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Distt.Raipur (CG)
2. Public Information Officer, Office of Inspector General Registration, Superintendent of Stamps, Raipur (CG)
3. Inspector General, Registration and Superintendent of Stamps, Chhattisgarh, Raipur (CG)
4. Collector, District Raipur (CG) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :
Ms S. Harshita, Advocate For Respondent No.1 :
Mr.Shyam Tekchandani, Advocate For State :
Mr.Ashish Surana, P.L.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 08/08/2017 1.
The Chhattisgarh State Information Commission after conclusion of the hearing has held that sufficient information has been furnished to the petitioner and granted further opportunity to him to make fresh application before the Inspector General of Stamps for further information, if any, by earmarking the land and further directed the State Authority to examine the case of the petitioner and do the needful, against which, this writ
petition has been filed.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that erroneous information has been given to the petitioner and as such, the order is unsustainable in law.
3.
Mr.Shyam Tekchandani, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1, would support the impugned order. 4.
I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, considered their rival submissions made hereinabove and also gone through the record with utmost circumspection. 5.
The State Information Commission has already been held that sufficient information has been supplied to the petitioner and also granted liberty to approach the Inspector General of Stamps for further information, if any. 6.
I do not find any jurisdictional error in the impugned order. Accordingly, the writ petition deserves to be and is hereby dismissed reiterating the liberty granted by the State Information Commission. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K.Agrawal) Judge B/-