AVAN BANJARA vs CHHATTISGARH STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION

1

CGHC010399642026 2026:CGHC:44963
NAFR
VISHAKHA
BEOHAR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally signed
by VISHAKHA
BEOHAR
WPC No. 5215 of 2026
1 - Avan Banjara S/o Late Mahattar Banjara Aged About 33 Years R/o
Village Kurrubhatha Post Naharpalli Thana Bhupdeopur Tahsil Kharshia
Distt- Raigarh - 496661
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - Chhattisgarh State Information Commission Commissioner, Sector-
19, North Block Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, Distt- Raipur - 492002 (C.G.)
2 - First Appeal Officer, Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat
Premnagar, Distt- Sarguja (C.G.)
3 - Secretary, (Public Information Officer P I O) Gram Panchayat
Bhagwanpur Janpad Panchayat Premnagar, Distt- Sarguja (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shubham Dewangan, Advocate.
For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Shyam Sunder Lal Tekchandani,
Advocate
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order on Board
26/10/2026

2
1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following
reliefs:-
“10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be
pleased to set aside the Final Order (impugned
order) passed by Chhattisgarh Sate Information
Commission Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh
(R-1) and remand back Second Appeal for
reconsideration it on merits.
10.2. That, dispose off with liberty to petitioner
that petitioner can approach the Chhattisgarh
Sate Information Commission Raipur District
Raipur Chhattisgarh (R-1) with complaint under
section 18 of Right to Information Act 2005 in
short RTI which Chhattisgarh Sate Information
Commission Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh
(R-1) can here and pass his final order in
stipulated time as per Hon'ble Court
10.3. That Hon'ble Court may direct Secretary
(Public Information Officer PIO) Gram Panchayat
Bhagwanpur Janpad Panchayat Premnagar
District Sarguja Chhattisgarh (R-3) for providing
information to the petitioner free of cost as per
Right to Information Act 2005 in short RTI.
10.4. Any other relief, which Hon'ble Court deems
fit and proper may also kindly be granted, in the
interest of justice.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Chhattisgarh
State Information Commission, Raipur, has dismissed the
petitioner's second appeal on the ground of delay without
affording him a fair opportunity of hearing and without considering

3
the reasons explained by him for the delay. It is contended that
the First Appellate Authority, namely, the Chief Executive Officer,
Janpad Panchayat, Premnagar, District Surguja, had not passed
the final order, and the petitioner was awaiting the same. It is
further submitted that the petitioner was suffering from illness and
had been advised complete bed rest by the treating doctors,
besides facing difficulties due to the ongoing construction of his
damaged house, which contributed to the delay in filing the
second appeal. Learned counsel submits that, despite furnishing
documents and explaining the reasons for the delay by way of a
notarized affidavit, the Commission dismissed the appeal without
considering the merits of the matter, particularly when the
information sought by the petitioner has not been furnished to him
till date. Therefore, the impugned order deserves to be set aside.
3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1, Chhattisgarh
State Information Commission, submits that the impugned order
has been passed in accordance with the provisions of the Right to
Information Act, 2005, after considering the material available on
record. It is contended that the petitioner has failed to establish
sufficient cause for the delay in filing the second appeal and that
the reasons assigned by him do not warrant interference with the
order passed by the Commission. Learned counsel, therefore,
submits that the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality
or infirmity warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its
writ jurisdiction and prays for dismissal of the petition.

4
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly
the delay of about 412 days in filing the second appeal by the
petitioner before the Chhattisgarh State Information Commission,
this Court is of the considered view that the Commission cannot
be said to have committed any error in declining to entertain the
second appeal on the ground of delay. Therefore, no interference
with the impugned order is warranted in the present petition.
6. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file a fresh application
seeking the requisite information in respect of the subject matter
of the earlier application, in accordance with law.
7. With the aforesaid liberty, the petition stands disposed of.
sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge
Vishakha