Disposed

Rakesh Kumar Agrawal (Advocate) v. Chhattisgarh State Information Commission

Chhattisgarh HC5 May 2023WPC/2060/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed the petitioner's RTI writ petition, holding the application to the District Collector was vague, absurd, and untainable. The court reserved the petitioner's right to approach the PIO in a prescribed format with specific details.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed; petitioner reserved the right to approach PIO in prescribed format with specific details.

Rakesh Kumar Agrawal (Advocate) Vs Chhattisgarh… — RTI and Transparency | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPC No. 2060 of 2023

¶5

Rakesh Kumar Agrawal (Advocate) S/o Late Kanhaiya Lal Agrawal Aged About 41 Years, R/o Nehru Ward, Bhatapara, District BalodabazarBhatapara, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. Chhattisgarh State Information Commission Through Chhattisgarh State Information Commissioner/ Second Appellate Officer, Sector 19, North Block, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

2. Commissioner/ First Appellate Officer, Raipur Division, Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶10

3. Collector/ Public Information Officer, Balodabazar, District BalodabazarBhatapara, Chhattisgarh

¶11

---- Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner For State

¶13

: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Agrawal, Petitioner in person : Mr. Aditya Tiwari, P.L.

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy

¶15

Order On Board

¶16

05.05.2023

¶17

1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner in person seeking for the following reliefs:

¶18

i) That this Hon’ble Court may kingly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities particularly the respondent no.3 to provide the documents applied through Right to Information Act within 30 days.

¶19

ii) That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no.1 to initiate action against the respondent No. 2 & 3 who have acted malafidely by not providing the documents as demanded by the petitioner.

¶20

2. Perusal of the pleadings and the documents attached to the writ petition would reflect that the primary grievance of petitioner is the inaction on the

¶21

¶22

part of respondent no.3 in providing any explanation to the application submitted by the petitioner before the District Collector dated 07.11.2022 (Annexure P-1).

¶23

3. Perusal of the contents of Annexure P-1 itself would make it evidently clear that the nature of information and guidance sought by the petitioner from the Collector was absolutely vague, absurd and untainable.

¶24

4. During the course of argument, the petitioner submits that his substantial grievance is in respect of the inaction on the part of the respondent in not deciding the various applications that he has moved before the District Administration pertaining to the grant of Bhoomi Swami right and in respect of rehabilitation of the landless persons. However, the letters enclosed along with the writ petition do not have any specific details of the case number which he is deprived of the necessary information and in respect of the progress of the same. Under the circumstances, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition.

¶25

5. Nonetheless, the right of petitioner would stand reserved to approach the concerned Public Information Officer in a prescribed format giving specific details of the information that he requires in respect of any specific document or case, as the case may be. It is expected that the concerned Public Information Officer in turn shall take appropriate decision on the same in accordance with law particularly keeping in view the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

¶26

6. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶27

Sd/P. Sam Koshy Judge

¶28

Khatai

Rakesh Kumar Agrawal (Advocate) v. Chhattisgarh State Information Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar Agrawal (Advocate) v. Chhattisgarh State Information Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muktanand Mahipal, Vs Shri Md. Qaiser Abdulhaque

Jeetan Sonpakar @ Ladhu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shivdas Manikpuri @ Sheran Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Company Limited Vs Smt. Sheela Hazari

M/s lawan Indane Gramin Vitrak, Vs Indian Oil Corporation Limited

Sukhlal Dewangan Vs State of Chhattisgarh