Bhuneshwar Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2087 of 2015 • Bhuneshwar Singh S/o Late Budhan Singh, Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Kanakpur, Post Silfili, P.S. Jainagar, Tehsil Surajpur, Revenue & Civil District Surajpur, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Forest, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Revenue & Civil District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)
2. Chhattisgarh State Information Commission, Through Secretary, Shastri Chowk, Raipur, Civil & Revenue District Raipur (Chhattisgarh). (Second Appellate Authority).
3. Chief Conservator Of Forest, Ambikapur, Revenue & Civil District Surguja (Chhattisgarh). (First Appellate Authority)
4. Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division Office Surajpur, P.S. & Tehsil Surajpur, Revenue & Civil District Surajpur (Chhattisgarh). (Public Information Officer) ---- Respondents And WPC No. 2088 Of 2015 • Bhuneshwar Singh S/o Late Budhan Singh, Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Kanakpur, Post Silfili, P.S. Jainagar, Tehsil Surajpur, Revenue & Civil District Surajpur, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner Vs
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Forest, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Revenue & Civil District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)
2. Chhattisgarh State Information Commission, Through Secretary, Shastri Chowk, Raipur, Civil & Revenue District Raipur (Chhattisgarh). (Second Appellate Authority).
3. Chief Conservator Of Forest, Ambikapur, Revenue & Civil District Surguja (Chhattisgarh). (First Appellate Authority)
4. Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division Office Surajpur, P.S. & Tehsil Surajpur, Revenue & Civil District Surajpur (Chhattisgarh). (Public
Information Officer) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :
Shri Surfraj Khan, Advocate For Respondents-State :
Shri Bhaskar Payashi, PL for the State For Respondent No.2 :
Shri Kunal Das, Advocate on behalf of Shri Shyam Tekchandani, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 26/11/2015
1. Petitioner had applied for obtaining information from the office of Public Information Officer, Divisional Forest Office, Surajpur under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short 'the Act, 2005'). When the required information was not supplied, he preferred an appeal under Section 19 (1) of the Act, 2005. The said appeal was decided in his favour vide order dated 14-7-2015 directing the Public Information Officer to allow inspection of the relevant record by the petitioner and grant certified copies up to 50 pages free of cost and thereafter in accordance with law. When the said order has not been complied with, the petitioner has preferred second appeal under Section 19 (3) of the Act, 2005 which is pending consideration.
2. In view of the fact that petitioner's second appeal is still pending consideration, the writ petitions are required to be disposed of with a direction to the appellate authority to consider and decide petitioner's second appeal at the earliest. Accordingly, the second appellate authority is directed to decide petitioner's appeal in accordance with law at the earliest, preferably within a period of two months from today. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra ashu