Dr. Ashish Rai v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 3683 of 2021

1. Dr. Ashish Rai S/o Rakesh Rai Aged About 32 Years Occupation Medical Officer Office C.H.C. Khadsara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh

2. Shri Rajesh Rai S/o Mahendra Rai, Aged About 54 Years Occupation Head Master, Government High School, Rajkishore Nagar, Bhaiyathan, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh

3. Smt. Suchita Rai, W/o Shri Rajesh Rai, Aged About 50 Years Occupation Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School, Karsu, Development Block Bhaiyathan, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh.

All Permanent R/o Beside Ploytechnic College, Ring Road Nemnakala, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Public Information, Mahanadi Bhawan New Mantralaya, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. The Block Medical Officer, Community Health Center Khandsara, Bemetara (Chhattisgarh)

3. The Chief Medical And Health Officer Office Chmo Bemetara District Bemetara Chhattisgarh

4. The First Appellate Officer, Chief Medical And Health Officer Office Chmo Bemetara District Bemetara Chhattisgarh

5. Public Information Officer, Office Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Bhaiyathan, Bhaiyathan, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh

6. Smt Anjali Rai W/o Dr Ashish Rai Aged About 32 Years R/o 1-C Colony Q.No.11 Bishrampur P.S. Bishrampur Tahsil And District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Shri Dev Ashish Biswas, Advocate For Respondents/State :

Shri Rahul Jha, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order

10/09/20

1. Heard.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioner No.1 was married to respondent No.6 on 09.02.2020. Thereafter, because of certain matrimonial dispute they are living separately. He would further submit that respondent No.6/wife has sought certain information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 2005') against the petitioners, who are government employees and the said information is being supplied. He would further submit that the orders may be passed that any personal information in respect of the petitioners shall not be supplied to the respondent No.6. He refers to the document of RTI that certain documents have been sought for with respect to the obtaining employment.

3. After consideration of the submission of the petitioner, it appears that it is a completely vague submission because what private nature of information is sought for has to be specifically stated and pleaded before the Court. There cannot be an omnibus general direction by the Court not to give any information which are personal in nature as the definition of personal information may vary according to individuals. The petition and the pleadings are so vague and no relief can be granted to the petitioner by a general order.

4. Accordingly, the petition sans merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. SD/-Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Ashu