WW11 fl»*l|tB ^sf ^-{Wv}^, w-^ww, [«i<nwy,< _..^f...^.lJY6^£/.!aiWl.200 sn^i •'raq? (1pf3^^) an^T VI Wi* wi a^f **<i<t> --(". SWPtR tft^d STl^T Stnqle Bench; Hon'ble Jilstice Dhirendra Mishra W.P.tC] No. (Petition under Article 22(| Petitioner : bev Kumar Pall Age about 35 Dabhara, tlistt. Defendant Vs Respondent Plaintiff 1. C.6. State thrpugh S^< Road, Shanl 2. Collector. Jl (C.6.) 3. Tahsildar, E|abhara, Distt. Janjgir Champa (C6) 20.3.2009 Mr. Manoj Jaiswal, Adv. for •t|he Mr. P.K. Bhaduri, Advocate f< Heard on I.A. No.l, applic|ation record. Allowed. Documents are takef The petitioner being aggrievi passed by the State Chief Infor>tiation preferred this petition for directio(i Commissioner to provide the petitioi within a period of 15 days. From perusal of the impugnec application of the petitioner notice 'biiiff'B-) Hi*<<"if 4 ftl& <r»i«;i< ^sifgii sii^l 631/2008 of Cons^itution of India) il, S/o Shri &igambar PrasadPatel, ears, R/o VillaQe & Post Salhe, Tah. Janjgir-Champa (CG) Information Commissioner Raipur, :retary Nirmal Chhaya Mira Datar ar Nagar, Raipur (.C.G.) mjgir-Champa, Distt. Janjgir Champa |ie petitioner. the respondents. for taking documents on on record. ^d by the order of Annexwe P-1 Commissioner, Raipur has to the State Chief Information jier information as desired by him order it is observed that on the ;fe were issued to the authorities WWSW <i=n<lils;"llri1<W-fi4'li'<—FS/95—11/2008—1,00,000. fNISWa'UK..—' ' .^3fn^SS»l''»5»K' .,iW!.iL-I*"-' -u-.J-' T ^ST "i|l'4ld'4, ®Tll+l'ls,faicll'My WHCTI a>*«cn •W[200 5ffl^r'<raq; (yit3»i<i°I) wfetif Sf^ *W* ^ y TOiim^tosii^i -z.' i.e. Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat<(; also reveals that the informatiot furnished by the respondents, hout and thereafter the information di 51'ate Chief Information Comrrli information sought by the petition^ Tehsitdar with a copy of the same. It has been observed by the^ that in case the petitioner is aggi concerned, he can prefer an appea| and he can also inspect the recordsj Af-ter going through the impj opinion that information sought by directed to be furnished and the The petition being devoid dismissed and is accordingty hereby itself. No order- as to costs. •iiitiict'ii-i tiiitfl ^ rs-<3 <r«i'<!< •^sifan sn^i well as Tehsildar concsrneql, If sought by the petitioner was )ever, the same was not accepted >ught was furnished before the issioner free of cost. Other :r was also furnished by the Naib State Information Commissioner ieved by the order of Tehsildar before the competent authority jgned order, this Court is of the the petitioner has already been sahie has been -furnished. of substance deserves to be jdismissed at the admission stage Sd/- - . DhirendraMishra Judge ^i B ^ f'i It' a • RS —