PETITIONER §§§$LE E92 @@ IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR §C.G.) RESPONDENTS ‘ Sewak Ram Suryawanshi, S/ o Late Shri Kedar Nath Suryawanshi, age 60 years, Occupation—Labour, R/o Village-Bhadra, Tahsil—Pamgarh, District—Janjgir—Champa (C.G.) VERSUS /:1. Chhattisgarh Rajya Suchna Aayog, through Rajya Suchna Ayukta, Nirmal Chhaya Bhawan, Meeradatar Road, Shankar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) ' Chief Information Commissioner, Chhattisgarh State Information Commission, Raipur (C.G.) Chief Executive Officer, Janjgir- Champa, , District—Janjgir—Champa (C.G.) Jan Suchna Adhikari/ Sachiv, Gram Panchayat, Bhadra, Districtv Janjgir—Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE ‘CONSTITUTIO M w.P. (c1 NoJUc ?) of 201g, HIGH COURT OF CHHATT!SGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETiTiON (C) NO. 1263 (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Singie Bench : Hon’bie Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :- 3hri Atui Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Shashank Thakur, Panei Lawyer for the State. ORDER {ORAL (Passed on this 29‘ day of August, 201 1) we Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that by order dated 1733:2010 (Annexure P—1), the respondent was directed to submit informatien/as sought by the petitioner/which run into 3000 pages, tree of cost. within a period of 15 days. Despite the ciear direction, no information has been supplied to him as on date. 2. Learned counsei fwther submits that there is no provision under the Right to information Act, 2005 (for short "the Act, 2005’) to ensure compiiance or” the order passed by the State information Commission. . 3. On perusai of the provisions, it is found that Section 19(8) ciearly provides that the State information Commission has the power to seek compiiance of the order passed by the authority. The petitioner ought to have approach to the State information Commission again when there was no compiiance of its order. The petitioner has chosen to come to this Court without iooking into the reievant provisions, as contained in sub section 8 of Section 19 of the Act, 2005. Thus, at this stage, this petition cannot he entertained, as sufficient provisions for compiianoe of the order passed by the State information Commission is availabie. 4. Accordingiy, the writ petition is dismissed. However, iiberty is teserved to the petitioner to make appropriate appiioation before the State information Commission for seeking compiianoe of the order passed by the Commission. ‘ ashok “sit/- SATIsH K, ANGNIHORI Judge PETlTwNER Sewak Ram Suryawanshi RESPONDENTS Versus Chhattisgarh Rajya