| SNo. | Registration No | Appellate Authority Name | Received date | Reply Appeal | Reply Doc |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1381 | CICOM/A/P/23/00006 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 11-01-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/P/22/00603 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that no response to information sought under RTI Act. DECISION OF 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. In the instant case, the CPIO furnished reply to the RTI application on 09.01.2023, but as mentioned by the appellant in the first appeal of non-receipt of the reply, a copy of the RTI reply is being attached with this order. 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 |
| 1382 | CICOM/A/E/23/00033 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 11-01-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/T/22/00100 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. In the instant case, the grounds raised by the appellant in the First Appeal do not coincide with the information sought in the RTI Application. 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 |
| 1383 | CICOM/A/E/23/00034 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 11-01-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/23/00007/3 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that “COMPELLED FORMAL SUBMISSIONS BEFORE FIRST APPEALLATE AUTHORITY, CIC IN CONNECTION WITH CICOM/R/E/23/00007/3 (.)REQUISITE officially warranted DULY NUMBERED DOCUMENT BEARING SIGNATURE AND SEAL OF concerend&competent, DESIGNATED CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER of Central Information Commission to dejure signify due legal disposal of Subject RTI UNDER YOUR kind AUSPICES HAS NOT BEEN DULY ATTACHED TO/DULY UPLOADED ON RTI ONLINE SITE ON 09.01.2023 HENCE IS APPEAL FOR NECESSARY ACTION ACCORDINGLY PLEASE. ((..))Furthermore I May Very Kindly Inform your goodself that much against the usual reasonable practice, Nodal Officer(CIC) Has failed to disclose the basically required to be provided Individual Email ID and Contact Details of Concerned&Relevant CPIO AND (((…)))Furthermore Official Disposing my Subject RTI At RTI Online Platform On 09.01.2023 Has Failed To Disclose Relevant Details/provisions in connection with appeal to First Appellate Authority &/or His/Her Contact Details Please. Besides this WRT 2 Serial No(s) Assigned to/Attended By CPIO IE. Ref. Sl No.3&10 respectively undersigned has to submit that 1(3) In juxtaposition of Most Reasonably expected relevant information ie. Contact DETAILS VIZ. CONTACT INDIVIDUAL EMAIL ID, CONTACT MOBILE, LANDLINE NUMBER & OFFICE ADDRESS OF ALL COMPETENT OFFICIAL/S OF NATIONAL INFORMATICS CENTRE UNDER AUSPICES OF CIC IS PENDING PROVIDING BY THE CONCERNED CPIO Hence very kindly content request reiterated vide this Appeal Please. 2(10) REQUESTED SPECIFIC INFORMATION which was specifically requested WRT NODAL OFFICER/S OF UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD AS LISTED & ENROLLED IN RECORD OF CIC has not been provided by the concerned CPIO Hence VERY KINDLY CONTENT REQUEST REITERATED VIDE THIS APPEAL Please. NOTE I HEREBY FORMALLY UNDERTAKE TO PAY THE COST REQUISITIONED IN THE FIRST INSTANCE PLEASE†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 |
| 1384 | CICOM/A/E/23/00032 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 11-01-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/22/01255 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that: “On 10-Dec-22 I made RTI Online request No. CICOM/R/E/22/01255 for: 1. Name, designation and email ID of: (a) the Nodal Officer appointed for CIC in compliance of para-5.1 of the Guidelines from which para 4.5 is cited in the CIC letter No. CIC/Legal/RTI/2022 dated 07/12/22, and (b) the officer under supervision of whom Nodal Officer is to work in terms of said para-5.1. 2. (After taking necessary assistance u/s 5(4) from Nodal Officer): (a) copy / copies of the decision/s - in whatever form taken (e.g., on file, by office order, in meeting, in a Decision of the Commission, etc) - to discontinue and change to NOT APPLICABLE on CIC website the disclosure u/s 4(1)(b)(vii) of RTI Act that was started by Decision dated 26/03/2009 in F. Nos. CIC/WB/C/2007/00139 & CIC/WB/A/2007/01702, and (b) In case not included in the decision/s requested at 2(a) also details of the exceptions whereby CIC does consult, or entertain representations from, members of the public. On 09-Jan-23, my request was disposed of with a letter stating under Information provided: 1(a) Joint Secretary(Admn). The email ID of the Nodal officer JS(Admin) is available in the CIC website. (b) The Nodal officer works under the supervision of an authority in accordance with the DoPT guidelines issued in this regard. 2(a) No such information is available. (b) However, disclosures are uploaded under 4(1)(b) with the approval of the Competent Authority GROUNDS: Point-1: Response is incomplete. Guidelines Para-5.1 says: Each Central Ministry/ Public Authority should appoint a senior officer not below the rank of a Joint Secretary and not below rank of Additional HOD in case of attached offices for ensuring compliance with the proactive disclosure guidelines. The Nodal Officer would work under the supervision of the Secretary of the Ministry/Department or the HOD of the attached office. CPIO has informed only designation of Nodal Officer, i.e., JS(Admin), for which the name Shri Rahul Rastogi and email ID rahul.rastogi@gov.in are available at https://cic.gov.in/cic-official-directory that shows post of Secretary is vacant. Point-1(b) has been evaded. Point-2: Response is incorrect / evasive and CPIO has not said assistance of Nodal Officer was taken. Response for point 2(a) is patently incorrect. A direction issued by the Commission u/s 19(8)(a)(iii) to its offices that was complied stopped being complied with. Some decision would have been taken to discontinue compliance. Response for point 2(b) is unrelated to the request. REQUEST: Please provide with your order the information for point 1(b) and please have CPIO take assistance of Shri Rahul Rastogi, JS (Admin) / Nodal Officer for duly deciding point-2. NB: In case you are inclined to reject my appeal request, please hold hearing first.†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 |
| 1385 | CICOM/A/P/23/00004 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 10-01-2023 | पà¥à¤°à¤¥à¤® अपील का आधार “अपीलकरà¥à¤¤à¤¾ केंदà¥à¤°à¥€à¤¯ जन सूचना अधिकारी के जवाब से संतà¥à¤·à¥à¤Ÿ नहीं है। निरà¥à¤£à¤¯ आर.टी.आई. आवेदन, पà¥à¤°à¤¦à¤¾à¤¨ की गई सूचना 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. 53584/2022/आर.टी.आई पà¥à¤°à¤•à¥‹à¤·à¥à¤ /विविध के पà¥à¤°à¤¤à¤¿à¤‰à¤¤à¥à¤¤à¤° में केंदà¥à¤°à¥€à¤¯ जन सूचना अधिकारी दà¥à¤µà¤¾à¤°à¤¾ पà¥à¤°à¥‡à¤·à¤¿à¤¤ की गई सूचना, सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के पà¥à¤°à¤¾à¤µà¤§à¤¾à¤¨à¥‹à¤‚ à¤à¤µà¤‚ मांगी गई सूचना के अनà¥à¤¸à¤¾à¤° ही है। परनà¥à¤¤à¥ केंदà¥à¤°à¥€à¤¯ जन सूचना अधिकारी के जवाब में विलमà¥à¤¬ होने के कारण केंदà¥à¤°à¥€à¤¯ जन सूचना अधिकारी को यह निरà¥à¤¦à¥‡à¤¶ दिया जाता है कि वह अपीलकरà¥à¤¤à¤¾ को आर.टी.आई. आवेदन सं. 53584/2022/आर.टी.आई पà¥à¤°à¤•à¥‹à¤·à¥à¤ /विविध तहत मांगी गई सूचना 10 दिन के à¤à¥€à¤¤à¤° दिनांक 21.01.2023 तक अपीलकरà¥à¤¤à¤¾ को (फà¥à¤°à¥€ ऑफ कॉसà¥à¤Ÿ) पà¥à¤°à¥‡à¤·à¤¿à¤¤ की जाये। | NA |
| 1386 | CICOM/A/E/23/00029 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 09-01-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/22/01254 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that: FACTS: On 10-Dec-22, I made online request No. CICOM/R/E/22/01254 for copy of Agenda note for the item No. 2 in Minutes of Meeting of the Commission held on 20-May-2020 (cited in decision dated 07-Dec-22 of Legal Cell CPIO, copy of which I attached). On 09-Jan-23 Admin Section CPIO has disposed of my request by uploading letter stating as under Information provided: The information is available in the CIC website the URLs of which is given below: https://cic.gov.in/circulars-and-mom/27 GROUNDS: A. I have requested information in form of COPY and am entitled u/s 7(9) to be provided COPY if no exception applies and no exception has been invoked. B. CPIO has, instead of providing the requested copy, given MISLEADING / FALSE information. The URL informed is the Minutes of Meetings link on CIC website Home page. It is to running index of MOM (260 as of today). Only MOM are accessible from it. MOM of 20-May-2020 accessible is attached. No Agenda are accessible from the index or the MOM. REQUEST: Please provide the requested copy of Agenda with your order. NB: In case you are inclined to reject this appeal, please hold hearing first. In case you are inclined to direct CPIO to revisit, please let that be interim order (conveyed to me by email) and do not dispose of the appeal on RTI Online till revised response has been furnished and I have filed addendum appeal or conveyed that none is needed. 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(Admin Section) is directed to revisit the RTI application as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 and reply to the appellant by 16.02.2023. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |
| 1387 | CICOM/A/E/23/00030 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 09-01-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/22/01256 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that: FACTS: On 10-Dec-22, I made online request No. CICOM/R/E/22/01256. I attached Minutes of CIC Meeting held on 29-Nov-22 and requested for copy of Agenda note for item No.3 (Discussion regarding suggestions / recommendations to be given to the Parliamentary Standing Committee). On 09-Jan-23 Admin Section CPIO has disposed of my request by uploading letter stating under Information provided: The information is available in the CIC website the URLs of which is given below: https://cic.gov.in/circulars-and-mom/27 GROUNDS: A. I have requested information in form of COPY and am entitled u/s 7(9) to be provided COPY if no exception applies and no exception has been invoked. B. CPIO has, instead of providing the requested copy, given MISLEADING / FALSE information. The URL informed is the Minutes of Meetings link on CIC website Home page. It is link to running index of MOM (260 as of today). Only MOM (such as the one attached with my request) are accessible from it. No Agenda are accessible from it or from the MOM. REQUEST: Please provide the requested copy of Agenda with your order. NB: In case you are inclined to reject this appeal, please hold hearing first. In case you are inclined to direct CPIO to revisit, please let that be interim order (conveyed to me by email) and do not dispose of the appeal on RTI Online till revised response has been furnished and I have filed addendum appeal or conveyed that none is needed. 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(Admin Section) is directed to revisit the RTI application as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 and reply to the appellant by 16.02.2023. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |
| 1388 | CICOM/A/E/23/00028 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 07-01-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/22/01162 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that: FACTS: On 27-Nov-22, I made online request No. CICOM/R/E/22/01162. I attached therein Minutes of CIC Meeting held on 20-Nov-2018 and requested 5 points of information. This appeal is regarding points 1, 3 & 5, i.e.: 1. Copy of the Agenda No. 4 (Transparency Audit) that was Approved. 3. Copy of the Agenda No. 6 (Software for Transparency Audit) that was Approved. 5. URLs at which information, if any, was published u/s 4(1)(c) about the approvals dated 20-Nov-2018. On 23-Dec-22, Legal Cell CPIO disposed of my request with the following online Reply for points 1, 3 & 5: 1.Information is available in website of CIC-SO Admn 3.No information is available 5.No information is available. GROUNDS: Point-1 & 3: A) I have requested COPIES. I am entitled u/s 7(9) of the RTI Act to be provided COPIES if no exception applies and no exception has been invoked. B) The copies requested are of 2 AGENDA of ONE MEETING. That I have been informed one is available in the website and the other is not available is in itself peculiar / inconsistent. C) The information that Agenda No.6 is not available cannot be true. Although the RTI Act does not require the Commission to hold meetings, it has been doing so regularly since 2005 - obviously for purpose of the function u/s 12(4), i.e., a statutory purpose not served off-the-record and requiring u/s 4(1)(a) of RTI Act due maintenance of records. D) The information that Agenda No.4 is available in website of CIC is apparently false / misleading because no precise URL has been informed (and I requested copies because no Agenda are readily found on CIC website). Point-5: E) CPIO is not the officer authorised for disclosure u/s 4(1)(c) and Reply does not say assistance was taken of the Nodal Officer for compliance of section 4. F) CIC has designated multiple CPIOs at SO level and, as per DOPT guidelines, Nodal Officer at JS level. It appears CPIOs do not feel free to take assistance of Nodal Officer. That difficulty is unsurmountable in RTI process in other PAs, but CIC has designated single FAA at AS level. REQUEST: Please provide, with your order, the COPIES requested in point-1 & 3 and please confirm that decision on point-5 is informed by the Nodal Officer authorised for compliance of section 4. NB: If you are inclined to reject my appeal request, please provide speaking order in each of its grounds. If you are inclined to direct CPIO to revisit, please let that be interim order (conveyed to me by email) and do not dispose of the appeal on RTI Online till revised Reply has been issued and I have filed appeal addendum or conveyed that none is needed.†DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. For Point 1 & 3 CPIO(Admin Section) is directed to reply to Point no. 1 and 3 of the RTI application as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 16.02.2023. For Point 2, 4 & 5 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 |
| 1389 | CICOM/A/E/23/00020 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 05-01-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/22/01217 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that: FACTS: In online request dated 04-Dec-22 No. CICOM/R/E/22/01217, I attached Minutes of CIC Meeting held on 05-Sep-2017 and requested COPIES of: 1. Agenda No. 7 (Weeding out of link papers, facilitation memos, dak receipt, dispatch, misc. papers etc.) that was approved. 2. The current record retention schedule / policy, especially for: (a) Complaints, Appeals and Link Papers received Online, and (b) Recordings of hearings held by video conference / intra-video conference. 3. Office orders appointing Web Information Manager and nominating Records Officers under the Public Records Act 1993 On 04-Jan-23, my request was disposed of online with uploaded letter No. 2023/CIC/ ADMN/RTI dated 3rd January 2023 stating point-wise under Information provided: 1. The information is available on the website, the link of which is given below: https://cic.gov.in/circulars-and-mom-cic/155 2(a). Circular dated 13/6/2017 is available on the CIC website, the link of which is given below: https://cic.gov.in/circulars-and-mom-cic/155?combine=&edit-submit-clone-of-circulars-and-mom-reports-page-circular-of-cic=Apply 2(b). No such information is maintained. 3. No such information is available GROUNDS: Point-1: COPY of Agenda has been evaded with INCORRECT Reply. URL informed is Circulars of CIC link on Home-page, i.e., to start of running index of Circulars (354 as of today). It does not have Agenda of CIC Meetings. Point-2(a): URL informed is INCOMPLETELY TYPED (missing &Page=12 at the end). Circular dated 13/6/2017 (Office Memorandum for AppComs Services) is INCORRECTLY INFORMED. It is not record retention schedule. Point-2(b): Reply is UNCLEAR because it does not say recordings are not made. If recordings are made, they are covered u/s 2(f) and have to be duly maintained u/s 4(1)(a) of RTI Act - with record retention schedule under the Public Records Act and Manual of Office Procedure. Point-3: COPIES of office orders have been evaded with INCORRECT Reply. Office orders have to be available because the officers are appointed. WIM contact details are given at: https://cic.gov.in/web-information-manager. Records Officer of the Commission is mentioned in para (vi) of the OM listed in disclosure u/s 4(1)(b)(v) and available at: https://cic.gov.in/sites/default/files/Circulars%20&Noification/OfficeOrder_22022011.pdf REQUEST: Please provide with your order the COPIES for point-1 & 3 and copies / clear information for point-2. NB: In case you are inclined to direct CPIO to revisit, please let that be interim order (conveyed to me by email) and do not dispose of this appeal on RTI Online till after revised reply has been furnished and I have filed addendum appeal or conveyed that none is needed. DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. For Point 1 CPIO(Admin Section) is directed to revisit the Point no. 1 of the RTI application as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 14.02.2023. For Point 2(a),(b) & 3 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 |
| 1390 | CICOM/A/E/23/00010 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 05-01-2023 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/22/01223 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that no response received within the time limit: “No Any Response till today 05/01/2023†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 30.01.2023, free of cost. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |