Rahul Gupta Vs Chhattisgarh State Information Commission

3 - Additional Superintendent Of Police & First Appellate Authority Office Of Superintendent Of Police, Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh 497001

¶12

... Respondent(s)

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Gupta, In Person For Respondent No.1 : Mr. S.S. Tekchandani, Advocate For Respondents No. 2 & 3/State : Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, Govt. Advocate

¶14

SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

¶15

Order on Board

¶16

18/11/2025

¶17

Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2025.11.19 14:52:44 +0530

¶18

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:

¶19

2 / 4

¶20

“ 10.1. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, commanding Respondent No. 2 (Station House Officer & PIO, Mahila Thana, Ambikapur, District Surguja) to forthwith furnish the complete and accurate information sought by the Petitioner in their RTI application dated 05.07.2023 (Annexure P-4), in strict and immediate compliance with the order dated 03.02.2025 passed by Respondent No. 1 (Annexure P-8).

¶21

10.2. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, commanding Respondent No. 1 (State Information Commission) to immediately exercise its powers under Sections 18 and 20 of the RTI Act to ensure compliance by Respondent No. 2 with its order dated 03.02.2025 (Annexure P-8).

¶22

10.3. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, commanding Respondent No. 1 to immediately initiate, conduct, and conclude, within a time-frame stipulated by this Hon'ble Court, proceedings under Section 18, for the imposition of the maximum permissible penalty under Section 20(1) upon Respondent No. 2 for unjustified delay and willful noncompliance with its order dated 03.02.2025, and ensure recovery thereof according to law.

¶23

10.4. Issue appropriate directions to Respondent No. 2 to ensure that all pending and future RTI applications filed by the Petitioner, pertaining to ongoing legal matters necessitating information for their defense (e.g., FIR No. 03/2023), are dealt with and disposed of strictly in accordance with the time limits and provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, without

¶24

3 / 4

¶25

requiring repeated interventions.

¶26

10.5. Direct the Respondents, jointly and severally, to pay adequate monetary compensation to the Petitioner for the profound harassment, mental agony, financial loss (including litigation costs), and prejudice suffered due to the protracted denial of information and violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21.

¶27

10.6. Award the costs of this litigation in favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondents.

¶28

10.7. Recommend to the competent disciplinary authority to consider initiating appropriate disciplinary proceedings against Respondent No. 2 for dereliction of statutory duties and defiance of lawful orders, and against Respondent No. 3 for failure of adequate supervision, in accordance with the applicable service rules

¶29

10.8. Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. ”

¶30

Mr. Rahul Gupta, petitioner in person submits that as of now he is seeking a direction to respondent No.1 to consider the application submitted by him in the form of complaint forwarded to State Information Commission via e-mail dated 01.03.2025 which till date remained un-considered and no order has been passed.

¶31

Mr. S.S. Tekchandani, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 would submit that according to his information, application filed by petitioner in the form of complaint (Annexure P-9) is received in the office and it is also processed and registered as C/4531/2025/Raipur

¶32

4 / 4

¶33

and appropriate order would be passed within a period of three months.

¶34

In the aforementioned facts of case and submission of petitioner appearing in person as also submission of counsel for respondent No.1, I find it appropriate to dispose off this writ petition directing respondent No.1 to consider and take decision on complaint submitted by petitioner vide Annexure P-9 dated 01.03.2025, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶35

With the aforesaid observation and direction, writ petition stands disposed off.

¶36

Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶37

Praveen

Rahul Gupta v. Chhattisgarh State Information Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Gupta v. Chhattisgarh State Information Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Udal Vs Beena

Heeralal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jalsai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Roshanlal Chahal Vs Panchram @ Pancham Kewat And Ors.

Chand Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Raghuvansh Tiwari (in Person) Vs Commissioner