There are serious errors in your form submission, please see below for details.

Search RTI Appeal

List of RTI Appeal

SNo. Registration No Appellate Authority Name Received date Reply Appeal Reply Doc
1651 CICOM/A/E/22/00175 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 04-07-2022 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/22/00610 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that: Sir I am sought an information of action taken about submission request dated 10 june 022 (Dy no 632034) duly certified .But cpio has not been provided yet the information as per RTI request dt 28 june 022. Hence I am requested to you please d to directed to cpio complete information in Diary no 632034 of 2022. I shall be everpray always to you for this kindness of act. Enclosed- An request alongwith documents DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. CPIO has already provided the complete file to the applicant. Applicant has sought for complete file in software at Commission for pending file no. CIC/CISFO/A/2022/618319. There was no mention of Diary No. 632034 of 2022 in the original RTI application, which has been mentioned by the appellant in his grounds for first appeal. 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
1652 CICOM/A/E/22/00171 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 02-07-2022 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/22/00373 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that: Kindly consider the first appeal u/s-19(1) and review the response of PIO on following grounds. 1- PIO has violated the mandated time limit in uploading the response of application, necessary action may kindly be adopted. 2- Certified copies were asked for in item no-1 of original application, which is not provided till date. kindly instruct the PIO to provide the certified hard copies as desirous in the original application. 3- In item no-2 it was asked for to inform the expected time of action on diary no-611190 dated-02.02.2022. But not responded by PIO. kindly instruct them to respond this point. 4- No comment were made against item no-3 of OA, kindly instruct them to respond this point of OA. 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, the CPIO(DR to IC-UM) is directed to revisit the RTI application and reply to Point 3 of the RTI application as per the RTI Act, 2005 by 10.08.2022 and is also directed to reply to all the RTI applications within the prescribed time limit as per the RTI Act, 2005 in the future. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1653 CICOM/A/E/22/00173 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 02-07-2022 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/22/00508 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that: Sir Please to refer the RTI filed for that not to know about the service level agreement for the disposal of second appeal but to get the information in regards to why the APPEAL REGISTERATION NO 614530 not disposed so far even after approx 4 months of the appeal registration dated 10th March 2022 but ultimately the PIO refused the INFORMATION sough 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
1654 CICOM/A/E/22/00172 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 02-07-2022 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/22/00416 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that No Response Within the Time Limit: Respected Sir, Prayer for appointment letter Assam Power Distribution Company Limited (APDCL) is a public limited company, wholly owned by the Government of Assam. It was incorporated on the 23rd day of October 2009 and has been registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 The Company, Assam Power Distribution Company Ltd. was incorporated on the 23rd day of October, 2009 as a public limited company wholly owned by the Government of Assam. The ultimate object of the Company is to undertake the electricity distribution, trading, supply in the state of Assam or outside in accordance with provisions of Applicable Law and all activities registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 , The Chairperson and Members of the Central Commission shall be appointed by the Central Government on the recommendation of the Selection Committee referred to in section 78.1956 I request you to provide me with an appointment letter ,in (Assam Power Distribution Company Limited (APDCL) Assam Power Generation Corporation Limited (APGCL) is a public limited was constituted under provisions Act 2003 and it public sector company registered Act 1956 under the company of electricity company, wholly owned by the Government of Assam.Act 2003 and it it is public sector company registered under company Act 1956 it was formed out of Assam STATE Electricity Broad in 2003 and was notified as the power Generation utility The co-ordinate Development of power generation and it is efficiency Management in the entire State of Assam Assam power generation corporation limited The ultimate object of the Company is to undertake the electricity distribution, trading, supply in the state of Assam or outside in accordance with provisions of Applicable Law and all activities registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 , The Chairperson and Members of the Central Commission shall be appointed by the Central Government on the recommendation of the Selection Committee referred to in section 78 1956 I request you to provide me with an appointment letter ,in (Assam Power Generation Corporation Limited (APGCL) please do needful I am writing to inform you that am / I have not receive any appointment letter, so I request you to provide me with an appointment letter This is for kind information and necessary action 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, the Appellant has submitted the first appeal after 30 days of receipt of reply of the CPIO i.e. reply dated 23.05.2022. The First Appeal has been initiated by the appellant on 02.07.2022, which is well beyond 30 days. Appellant has not specified anything which could be taken as sufficient cause for the appellant not filing the appeal in time. So, this appeal cannot be taken into consideration as the time limit for submission of first appeal has already exceeded. The appeal is not admitted as per Subsection (1) of Section 19 of the RTI Act, 2005. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1655 CICOM/A/P/22/00096 AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE 30-06-2022 Reference RTI No.CICOM/R/P/22/00274 प्रदान की गई सूचना केन्‍द्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी (DR to IC-HS) द्वारा पत्र सं. CICOM/R/P/22/00274 दिनांक 08-06-2022 के माध्यम से प्रदान की गई सूचनाएं इस प्रकार है:- “Your letter dated 20.04.2022 received in the Commission vide dairy number 119012 dated 21.04.2022 and same has been electronically linked in the appeal file number CIC/LTGSE/A/2020/130191. As per the record in the appeal file, no action has been taken in the said letter till date.” प्रथम अपील का आधार अपीलकर्ता द्वारा CPIO (DR to IC-HS) के पत्र संख्या CICOM/R/P/00274 दिनांक 08-06-2022 के माध्यम से प्राप्त सूचना से असंतुष्ट होकर, सूचना के अधिकार अधिनियम 2005 की धारा 19 (1) के अंतर्गत प्रथम अपील दाखिल की गई है। निर्णय संबंधित संचिका (प्रथम अपील आवेदन एवं आर.टी.आई. आवेदन) का अवलोकन करने पर पाया गया कि अपीलकर्ता के आर.टी.आई. आवेदन सं. CICOM/R/P/22/00274 के प्रतिउत्तर में केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी (DR to IC-HS) द्वारा प्रदान की गई सूचना, सूचना के अधिकार अधिनियम के प्रावधानों के अनुसार सही है। माननीय सूचना आयुक्त के आदेश का अनुपालन नहीं करने की स्तिथि में किसी जन सूचना अधिकारी के खिलाफ अवमानना की कार्यवाही सुनिश्चित करना, केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी के कार्यक्षेत्र में नहीं आता है। उल्लेखनीय है कि सूचना अधिकार के अधिनियम की धारा 2 (च) के प्रावधानों के अनुसार एक जन सूचना अधिकारी केवल सम्बंधित लोक प्राधिकरण के रिकॉर्ड में एक सामग्री के रूप में उपलब्ध सूचना ही प्रदान कर सकता है। अतः केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी (DR to IC-HS) द्वारा प्रदान की गई सूचना तथ्यात्मक है और इसमें प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी के हस्तक्षेप की कोई आवश्यकता नहीं है। तद्नुसार अपील निस्‍तारित की जाती है। NA
1656 CICOM/A/E/22/00168 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 30-06-2022 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/22/00349 DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. The opportunity of written submission, for the first appeal, provided to the appellant is found to be reasonable opportunity of hearing. The written submissions made by the appellant in his first appeal application are found to be sufficient for consideration by the FAA to arrive at a decision under the RTI Act, 2005. Accordingly, it was felt that the personal hearing as requested by appellant was not necessary. 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. Looking at the information sought by the appellant, it is understood that CPIO has to collate and collect lot many information from the E-books. CPIO is not expected to collate and collect the information under the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1657 CICOM/A/E/22/00169 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 30-06-2022 Ref RTI No- CICOM/R/T/22/00053 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that: Sir, I visited the site of CIC but not able to find data year wise , please take a printout of data year wise and provide 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 or collate information that is not a part of the record. The information once published in public domain may not be treated as information held by a particular public authority. 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
1658 CICOM/A/E/22/00170 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 30-06-2022 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/E/22/00446 DECISION OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. The opportunity of written submission, for the first appeal, provided to the appellant is found to be reasonable opportunity of hearing. The written submissions made by the appellant in his first appeal application are found to be sufficient for consideration by the FAA to arrive at a decision under the RTI Act, 2005. Accordingly, it was felt that the personal hearing as requested by appellant was not necessary. CPIO (MR Section) is directed to provide the clear information as per the available records or else the opportunity of inspection of records, which are relevant to the information sought, to the appellant under his custody, by 16.08.2022. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
1659 CICOM/A/P/22/00095 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 29-06-2022 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/P/22/00216 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that: “..I have not received any reply even after 50 days, I am submitting the first appeal. Kindly furnish me the information called for, with certified copies for the queries mentioned in my RTI application. As the CPIO has failed to furnish the fundamental information sought for; it need to be considered as a deficiency in service on the part of the CPIO, and wilful violation of the RTI Act section 7(2). Further as the information call for was not furnished within the stipulated time of 30 days, as per section 7(6), the information sought for should be furnished free of charge. Again as per section 20(1) of the RTI Act 205, the CPIO is liable to get the maximum penalty of Rs.250 per day and as per section 20(2) of the RTI Act, 2005, the CPIO is also liable for disciplinary action, for not furnishing the required information, and for the non-compliance of the RTI Act, 2005.” DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. In the instant case, the CPIO (DR to IC-UM) has disposed of the RTI application electronically on the RTI portal dated 14.06.2022 but did not send the reply to the appellant physically. Notwithstanding the above, the CPIO (DR to IC-UM) is directed to provide the reply to RTI application to the appellant by 03/08/2022, free of cost. NA
1660 CICOM/A/P/22/00094 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 29-06-2022 Reference RTI No.CICOM/R/P/22/00235 प्रथम अपील का आधार अपीलकर्ता द्वारा CPIO/ DR to IC (SP) के पत्र संख्या CICOM/R/P/00235 दिनांक 16-06-2022 के माध्यम से प्राप्त सूचना से असंतुष्ट होकर, सूचना के अधिकार अधिनियम 2005 की धारा 19 (1) के अंतर्गत प्रथम अपील की गई है। निर्णय संबंधित संचिका (प्रथम अपील आवेदन एवं आर.टी.आई. आवेदन) का अवलोकन करने पर पाया गया कि अपीलकर्ता के आर.टी.आई. आवेदन सं. CICOM/R/P/22/00235 के बिंदु संख्या 3 के प्रतिउत्तर में केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी (DR to IC-SP) द्वारा प्रदान की गई सूचना, सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के प्रावधानों के अनुसार सही है। उल्लेखनीय है कि सूचना अधिकार का अधिनियम की धारा 2 (च) के प्रावधानों के अनुसार एक जन सूचना अधिकारी केवल सम्बंधित लोक प्राधिकरण के रिकॉर्ड में एक सामग्री के रूप में उपलब्ध सूचना ही प्रदान कर सकता है। अतः केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी (DR to IC-SP) द्वारा प्रदान की गई सूचना तथ्यात्मक है और इसमें प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी के हस्तक्षेप की कोई आवश्यकता नहीं है। तद्नुसार अपील निस्‍तारित की जाती है। NA