x/M HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petitiogfkdi s43 of 2010 PETITIONER Arjun Lal Yadav Sio Late Shri Dukalu Ram Yadav, Aged about 48 years, Occupation Music Teacher, BIL Bilaspur, Rlo Neav Mama Bhanja Talab, Tikrapara, Biiaspur, Tahsii & District Biiaspur (C.G.) Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh through The Coiiector Biiaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) Pubiic Information Ofmer Coilectorate, Biiaspur (C.G.) (Omce of the District Coiiector Biiaspur) (C.G.) 3. "Chhattisgarh Smte information Commission Nirmal Chhaya Bhawan, Miradatar Road, Shanker Nagar Raipur (6.6.) Through : Deputy Secretary Chhattisgarh a State Information Commission (6.6.) ) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 8: 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Agpearance : Mr. Rahul Birtharey, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shashank Thakur, Panei Lawyer for the State/respondent No.1 on advance copy. ORAL ORDER (07.04.2010) SUNIL KUMAR SINHA‘ J. Heard. reiiet'(s):- Petitioner—Mun Lal Yadav has tiied this petition for the foiiowing “10. RELIEHS) SOUGHT: 10.1 That Hon’bie Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writlorderldirection in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding the respondent No.2 to supply the information demanded in clause 3 of the Original Application dated 30I01I2009 preferred under Right to information Act 2005. \ \ \‘ \ 10.2 That nature the of certiorari Hon‘ble court thereby may quashing kindly the be pleased order passed to issue in Second tn the Appeal No. 690/09 parties being Arjun Lal Yadav Versus Public \ x 2 go W.P.(C) No. 543 of 2010 information Officer, Office of the Distt. Coltentor Bilaspur (C.G.) by the Chhattisg’arh State information Commission Raipur (C.G.). 10.3 Any other relief, order(s)ldirection(s), which the Hon‘ble court may deem, tit and proper may also be given including the cost of the petition.” The main relief claimed by the petitioner is for quashing of the order dated 20.11.2009 passed by respondent No.3lChhattisgarh State lnformation Commission, by which, the Second Appeal No. 690/09 has been dimissed for want of prosecution. Admittedly, the petitioner has not approached to the Second Appellate Authority for restoration of his appeal and has tiled this writ petition before this Court. The petitioner has tiled additional documents along with LA. No. 1!201 0, which are informations sought by the petitioner regarding‘the restoration of the dismissed matters as the present one. ln answer to the informations, the Public information Officer of Chhattisgarh State Information Commission has informed that there are no provisions for restoration of‘an appeal in the Rules. However in special circumstances, the Commission takes its decisions on its own wisdom. ln the facts and circumstances of the case, when the petitioner has not tiled any application for restoration of the Second Appeal and has directly come to this Court in writ petition, l am of the opinion that the petitioner firstly should go before the 'Second Appellate Authority for seekin restoration of his matter and thereafter he should take further steps in accordance with law. in the above facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of at this stage with liberty to the petitioner to file an apptication for restoration of the appeal before the Chhattisgarh $tate information Commissionlrespondent No.3. m.