| SNo. | Registration No | Appellate Authority Name | Received date | Reply Appeal | Reply Doc |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1091 | CICOM/A/P/23/00102 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 18-07-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/P/23/00145 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that “I am to invite your kind attention towards the RTI application dated 25.02.2023 submitted to PIO CIC New Delhi and to say that the requisite information has not provided by the PIO within the time period, It is deem to be refused.†DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal and the RTI application have been perused. In the instant case, CPIO (DR to IC-UM) is directed to reply to the RTI application as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 31.07.2023, free of cost. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |
| 1092 | CICOM/A/E/23/00241 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 18-07-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/23/00517 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "...3. Another online response was received against Application No CICOM/R/E/23/00517. A copy of the online disposal dated 16/06/2023 is not enclosed for the sake of brevity. None of the CPIO have provided the details of the FAA while responding to the RTI request. 4. At the outset it is pertinent to understand the explanation of ‘information’ as defined under the RTI Act. In File No.CIC/SM/A/2011/002292 dated 22/08/2012, the Ho’ble Commission has held: whenever any information seeker wants any information, the CPIO has to find out the relevant record and make photocopies of those records and send to the Appellant and not attempt to offer his own interpretation or paraphrase of the available records.†5. The respective response of CPIO are evasive, incomplete and misleading. No material information/records, have been supplied. The replies of respective CPIO are not in conformity with the RTI Act. 6. Under the RTI regime, Disclosure is the norm & exemption an exception. The CPIOs have channeled their energy to hide the information. A mere formality has been carried out. 7. It is well settled that information can only be refused if the same is exempted. Records requested at para 1 of the Application stands refused. Pointed queries should be addressed with sufficient clarity and relevant records, which was not done. A vague reply has been advanced with a mallafide intent to hide the true information. 8. Records requested at para 2 & 3 has been mallafidely refused without claiming any exemption. It is pertinent to mention that information requested at para 2 & 3 of the Application are mandatory disclosure under Sec.4(1)(b) of the Act and merits suo motu disclosure on the CIC website. Unfortunately, the same stands refused arbitrarily. 9. Information requested at para 4 stands refused. With an ill intention to deceive the Applicant the CPIO has claimed to have been enclosed the requested records but the same is false & far from truth. No list has been received online and/or offline. 10. In File No. CIC/EPFOG/C/2019/114953 dated 26/08/2020, the Hon’ble Commission has held: “It is to be noted by the CPIO that merely claiming an exemption under Section 8 is not enough to absolve a CPIO from performing the duties cast upon him under the RTI Act. It is relevant to mention here that in order to deny information under any of the exemption clauses mentioned under Section 8 (1) of the RTI Act, 2005, the respondent is required to provide justification or establish the reason why such exemption was claimed which was not done.†Records requested at para 5 has been refused by claiming exemption under Sec.8(1)(j) of the Act. No justification has been advanced as to how the said exemption is attracted to the instant query. The said eecords are not exempted under any clause of the RTI Act. On the contrary, the same is a mandatory disclosure under Sec.4(1)(b) of the Act. 11. Response to para 6 of the Application is vague & misleading. 12. In sum, every bit of information is refused on flimsy pretexts, which is unjustified. Inapplicable exemptions have been invoked, suo motu disclosure has been prevented under the garb of ‘No such information available’. Besides, material information stands refused with an ill intention to defeat the very purpose & object of the Act. 13. In the interest of transparency, it is humbly prayed: a. To kindly direct the CPIO to provide complete, correct & relevant information at the earliest. b. To kindly direct the CPIO to upload the RTI Application, Appeal and respective orders on CIC website, in terms of DOPT guidelines. c. To kindly afford an opportunity of Personal Hearing, preferably through Video/Audio conferencing, before disposal of the instant Appeal. d. To kindly direct the CPIO to provide the particulars of the FAA while disposing the RTI requests. e. Any other measure, your honour deems fit & proper, in interest of transparency & accountability, the avowed object of the RTI Act." DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIOs of CIC have been perused. For Point No. 1, 2, 3, 5 & 6 CPIO (Admin Section) is directed to revisit the RTI application for Point no. 1, 2, 3, 5 & 6 and provide information as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 21.08.2023. For Point No. 4 CPIO (Legal Cell) is directed to revisit the RTI application for Point no. 4 and provide information as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 21.08.2023. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |
| 1093 | CICOM/A/E/23/00240 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 16-07-2023 | आर.टी.आई. आवेदन à¤à¤µà¤‚ पà¥à¤°à¤¥à¤® अपील का अवलोकन करने पर पाया गया कि अपीलकरà¥à¤¤à¤¾ के आर.टी. आई. आवेदन सं CICOM/R/P/23/00438 के पà¥à¤°à¤¤à¤¿à¤‰à¤¤à¥à¤¤à¤° में कोई à¤à¥€ सूचना पà¥à¤°à¤¦à¤¾à¤¨ नहीं की गई है। अतः केंदà¥à¤°à¥€à¤¯ जन सूचना अधिकारी को यह निरà¥à¤¦à¥‡à¤¶ दिठजाता है कि वह अपीलकरà¥à¤¤à¤¾ को आर.टी.आई. आवेदन सं. CICOM/R/P/23/00438 तहत मांगी गई सूचना दिनांक 14.08.2023 तक अपीलकरà¥à¤¤à¤¾ को (फà¥à¤°à¥€ ऑफ कॉसà¥à¤Ÿ) ऑफलाइन पà¥à¤°à¥‡à¤·à¤¿à¤¤ की जाये। | NA |
| 1094 | CICOM/A/E/23/00239 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 14-07-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/23/00710 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that “To FAA, CIC, New Delhi. SIR, THE CONCERNED CPIO HAS NOT PROVIDED THE RELEVANT REPLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE VERY CONTENT / CONTEXT OF RTI APPLICATION I.E. WHAT ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE HONOURABLE CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER, CIC, NEW DELHI UPON MY EMAIL COMPLAINT DATED 23.06.2023 FILED AGAINST THE REGISTRAR, CIC, NEW DELHI. HENCE, THIS APPEAL. THEREFORE, IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE ACTION TAKEN BY HONORABLE CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER, CIC AGAINST THE ERRING AND DELINQUENT OFFICIAL OF CIC I.E. THE REGISTRAR, CIC WHO DID BLATANT ILLEGALITY TO DECIDE SECOND APPEAL DURING SCRUTINY BY CONSIDERING HIMSELF AS A DECISION PRONOUNCING AUTHORITY & PRONOUNCED HIS SO CALLED DECISION ILLEGALLY & RELEVANT FACTS HAD ALREADY BEEN DELINEATED IN EMAIL DATED 23.06.23 MAY PLEASE BE PROVIDED BECAUSE.†DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. In the instant case, CPIO(RTI Cell) is directed to revisit the RTI Application and forward/take assistance for the subject RTI application from the concerned CPIO as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, by 21.08.2023. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |
| 1095 | CICOM/A/P/23/00101 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 13-07-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/P/23/00320 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating “Deemed refusal to reply under RTI Act 2005.†DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. For Point 4(i) As per Section 7(9) of the RTI Act, 2005, “An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question.†Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. For Point 4(ii) As per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create or collate information that is not a part of the record. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |
| 1096 | CICOM/A/E/23/00237 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 13-07-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/23/00595 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating no response within the time limit “My request No. CICOM/R/E/23/00595, made on RTI Online on 04/06/23, is pending with CPIO DO to IC(UM). CPIO may please be asked to give decision.†DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal and the RTI application have been perused. In the instant case, CPIO (DR to IC-UM) is directed to reply to the RTI application as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 18.08.2023, free of cost. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |
| 1097 | CICOM/A/E/23/00238 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 13-07-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/23/00602 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating no response within the time limit “My request No. CICOM/R/E/23/00602, made on RTI Online on 04/06/23, is pending with CPIO DO to IC(UM). CPIO may please be asked to give decision.†DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal and the RTI application have been perused. In the instant case, CPIO (DR to IC-UM) is directed to reply to the RTI application as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 18.08.2023, free of cost. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |
| 1098 | CICOM/A/E/23/00235 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 13-07-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/23/00652 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that “I am aggrieved this case no(CIC/MCOAL/A/21/629159) was listed on 27-10-2022. However, the CIC settled the case without an investigation. 2. No records related to this case were shown for perusal and I have not verified any documents regarding this decision. 3. Further, the CPIO in his letter dt:22-10-2022 to the Commission and in his compliance report dt:25-11-2022 has indicated that no files regarding this case have been received from the Ministry of Coal. 4. In that case, it is clear that the CPIO has violated the RTI Act 2005 by giving false information in the above compliance report.†DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. As per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create or collate information that is not a part of the record. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |
| 1099 | CICOM/A/E/23/00236 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 13-07-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/23/00734 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that “FACTS: My request dated 27/06/23 No. CICOM/R/E/23/00734 is for information about the RTI Annual Return Information System (RTIARIS), the original CIC software for data-gathering for its annual reports. I have cited in it the CIC Annual reports of 2010-11 and 2012-13 containing RTIARIS screenshots and attached with it the RTIARIS User Manual originally issued by CIC in 2006. I have requested only: (1a) the dates around 2010 and 2012 on which RTIARIS main-menu changes came into effect, (1b) any User Manuals issued after 2006, (2a) RTIARIS data-entry form each time it was changed, and (2b) approvals / orders by which the data-entry form was changed each time. On 13/07/23 MR Section CPIO has furnished combined reply: Such information is not available in this office. GROUNDS: Section 2(f) of RTI Act defines the information that I may request to mean material held by the public authority, not this or that office in it. RTIARIS is the original software for the statutory function u/s 25(1). All records related to RTIARIS are not only held by CIC as software owner but are also fit for permanent preservation (because RTIARIS shaped organisational history of CIC and also because data gathered through it is, besides screenshots of it, part of CIC Annual Reports). In a few years RTIARIS records will become due for transfer by CIC to the National Archives. The simple RTIARIS information that I have requested would not be available in CIC only if RTIARIS records were unauthorisedly destroyed or removed from CIC (which would have to be reported under the Public Records Act to the Director General of Archives). REQUEST: Please have the RTIARIS records found and have the requested information provided to me.†DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. As per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create or collate information that is not a part of the record. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |
| 1100 | CICOM/A/E/23/00233 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 12-07-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/23/00641/1 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that “I am not satisfied with CPIO Reply. I hope CPIO not understood my question clearly. If my question is not clear to CPIO then as per RTI act, CPIO can contact me to get clarification regarding my queries but CPIO not contacted me to get clarification regarding my queries and not provided the requested information. Due to these reasons the First Appeal is made under Section 19(1) of the RTI Act 2005 Please send the First Appeal’s investigation Result or order copy or information to my above mentioned address by Registered post and email id: balaramv87@gmail.com MY “PRAYER / PLEA†IN THIS FIRST APPEAL: 1) Instruct the CPIO, in writing, to give the complete information forthwith as requested in my RTI Application. 2) Issue a written warning to the CPIO, under the present Rules and Regulations of Service, instructing him that he should adhere to the time limits specified in the RTI Act 2005 as well as respect the RTI Act in its letter and spirit. 3) Inform the concerned CPIO that the appellant will move a Second appeal before the CIC under Section 19(3) and will demand imposition of penalty under Section 20 of the RTI Act, at the rate of Rs. 250.00 for every day of delay (subject to a maximum of Rs. 25,000.00) from the date the information was due till the date the full information is actually given to me. 4) As per Sec 7(6) of the RTI Act, the PIO should now provide me the information "free of Charge" since the provision of information has been delayed beyond the mandated 30 days as provided in Sec7(1) of the RTI Act. 5) As per Sec 19(5) of the RTI Act 2005, during the appeal proceedings, the CPIO, should be asked to explain his “deemed†denial of request for information, since the onus to prove that the denial of request was justified, is on the CPIO. 6) I want to he heard during the first appeal and will be available on Mobile:7411435858 It is therefore requested you to conduct a proper hearing for this First Appeal and instruct to PIO to supply of required Information.†DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. As per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 only such information as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authority can be provided by a PIO. The PIO is not supposed to create, collate or segregate information that is not a part of the record. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |