Revenue records may be obtained through certified-copy applications before competent authorities rather than RTI proceedings.

The petitioner alleged that Respondent No. 5 had fraudulently obtained a patta relating to her land bearing Khasra No. 90/2 at Village Dhansera, allegedly in collusion with the then Patwari and Revenue Inspector.

She sought information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 regarding the names and present designations of those revenue officials, action taken against them, and a copy of the patta issued in favour of Respondent No. 5.

As the information was not supplied, she filed a first appeal.

The Sub-Divisional Officer closed the appeal, observing that Respondent No. 5’s name was not included among the 131 persons issued settlement pattas in 1995–96.

During the pendency of the petitioner’s second appeal before the Chhattisgarh State Information Commission, certain information was supplied through letters dated 26.06.2024 and 27.06.2024.

The Commission dismissed the second appeal on 12.12.2025, holding that the available information had been supplied and that the remaining information did not fall within the concerned office’s domain.

Whether the petitioner was entitled to obtain the remaining information and revenue documents through her RTI application when the authorities had supplied the information available in their records.

Whether the petitioner could be directed to obtain copies of the relevant revenue proceedings and records by applying for certified copies before the competent revenue authority.

The Court applied the Right to Information Act, 2005, under which a public authority is required to provide information available in its possession or control, but is not required to create information, offer explanations, or provide material outside its domain.

The Court further applied the principle that documents forming part of revenue proceedings and revenue records may be obtained through an appropriate application for certified copies before the competent revenue authority, in accordance with law.

The Court examined the nature of the information sought and distinguished between information available with the RTI authorities and revenue documents maintained as part of official revenue proceedings.

Since the authorities had supplied the information available within their domain, the Commission’s conclusion was not interfered with to that extent.

However, insofar as the petitioner sought the patta and other relevant revenue records, the Court held that these documents could appropriately be obtained by applying for certified copies before the competent revenue authority, particularly the concerned Tahsildar or other revenue authority.

Accordingly, the Court modified the Commission’s order only to permit the petitioner to pursue that remedy.

The order dated 12.12.2025 passed by Respondent No. 2 was modified to the extent that the petitioner was granted liberty to approach the competent revenue authority and obtain certified copies of the relevant revenue documents in accordance with law.

The remaining portion of the impugned order was left undisturbed.