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
2141 CICOM/A/P/21/00064 AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE 05-07-2021 Please see the file. download pdf
2142 CICOM/A/P/21/00061 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 05-07-2021 Please see the file. download pdf
2143 CICOM/A/P/21/00062 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 05-07-2021 Please see the file. download pdf
2144 CICOM/A/E/21/00131 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 03-07-2021 The first appeal petition, RTI request and RTI reply have been seen. The CPIO is directed to provide the reply for the same once again free of cost by 29.07.2021. It is observed that the reply to the subject RTI application has been delayed. Hereafter, CPIO should reply the RTI applications in the time frame as specified in the RTI Act, 2005. The First appeal has been disposed off accordingly. NA
2145 CICOM/A/E/21/00130 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 01-07-2021 The First Appeal petition, RTI application and reply given by the CPIO have been seen. The appellant may please note that once information has been provided in public domain and on the website, the information is no longer held by or under the control of any public authority and hence, is no longer accessible as ‘right to information’. The reply furnished by the CPIO in respect of Point-1 is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is being disposed of accordingly. NA
2146 CICOM/A/E/21/00128 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 30-06-2021 CICOM/A/E/21/00121 & CICOM/A/E/21/00128 I. The applicant vide RTI application No. CICOM/R/E/21/00472 dated 26.05.2021 and No.CICOM/R/T/00028 (transferred from DOPT) dated 29.05.2021 had made same request which is reproduced below: “Kindly Provide Me the Details Under RTI Act 2005 As per section 6(3) of the RTI Act 2005 Outcome and action by NTPC and or O/o CIC on my attached letter mainly to following. A) Serious offense of disclosure of my name by NTPC CPIO concerned and PRAYER Compensation to me through penalty to NTPC NTECL KBUNL as per Sec. 20(1) of the RTI Act. B) Inordinate delay and incorrect information by CPIO. C) Inordinate delay to respond and ignorance by Appellate Authority NTPC. In case the requested information is held by another public authority I request the PIO to transfer the application or part of it within FIVE days and immediately inform me about such transfer as per section 7(8)(iii) and 7(3)(ii) of the RTI Act 2005. I request the PIO to Inform me of the particulars of First Appellate Authority.” II. Shri Rakesh Kumar Rao, CPIO (IC-UM), CIC had received both the above RTI requests on 29.05.2021 and 31.05.2021 and given online reply individually on 29.06.2021 mentioning “No email or letter has been received in this registry.” III. In his First Appeals dated 25.06.2021 & 30.06.2021, the Appellant, inter alia, mentioned as under: “...my RTI application is not seen properly. I am submitting this 1ST APPEAL as I am surprised to note the reply “No email or letter has been received in this registry.” I request O/o CIC to please arrange to email me information sought and hard copy later and permanent solution to subject matter which is repeated many a times.” IV. The First Appeal petitions, RTI applications and reply given by the CPIO have been seen. The CPIO is directed to revisit his reply and provide appropriate information to the appellant within 10 days from the date of this decision. The CPIO may seek information u/s 5(4) of RTI Act, 2005, if necessary. V. The appeal is being disposed of accordingly. NA
2147 CICOM/A/E/21/00129 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 30-06-2021 I. The applicant vide RTI application No. CICOM/R/E/21/00479 dated 28.05.2021 had requested the following information in connection with his Second Appeal decision No.CIC/SH/A/2015/001936 dated 18.11.2016. “1. Give details of confirmation of compliance of above said order of Ld. Information Commissioner by CPIO of e-obc. 2. Provide copy of intimation received, if any, from CPIO of e-obc confirming dissemination of information. 3. Give Details of statutory provisions for non-compliance of orders passed by any Ld. Information Commissioner and steps taken to secure compliance of orders, action taken against erring information officers. 4. Inform status of letters dated 16.12.2016 written to Ld. CIC, 20.01.2017 to Shri Vijay Bhalla and 18.06.2017 to Ld. CIC. 5. How does Hon’ble Commission ensure compliance of its orders, give details of steps taken with regard to subject matter to secure compliance of its order in above said matter. II. Shri R.Sitarama Murthy, DR to IC(SC), CIC had furnished point-wise online reply on 30.06.2021. “1&2: No such information is available in our records. 3. Your attention is drawn to the material available on the website of CIC regarding RTI Act, Rules and Decisions of various High Courts and Hon’ble Supreme Court. You may please go through and advise yourself in this regard. 4. Your letter dated 16.12.2016 is available in the record of C.I.C (PDF file). Other letters mentioned by you are not available on record. 5. As per general practice, the Commission moves at the instance of RTI appellant. The RTI appellant is expected to complaint about the non-compliance and register/file it under non-compliance category. There is no letter from you under non-compliance category. The above letter dated 16.12.2016 was registered, it seems, as a link paper. Thus, it might have been missed the required attention in C.I.C. However, keeping in view its long pendency of the case, the matter has been placed before the Hon’ble IC(SC), who has agreed to place it for hearing before him. You will get a notice in due course of time.” III. In his First Appeal dated 30.06.2021, “provided incomplete, misleading or false information” has been mentioned as the grounds for First Appeal and made submissions vide letter dated 01.07.2021. IV. The First Appeal petition, RTI application and reply given by the CPIO have been seen. As regards Points 1, 2 & 4, as per Section 2(f) of 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 collect information that is not a part of the record. Hence, reply of the CPIO, CIC is appropriate and as per the provisions of RTI Act, 2005. With regard to Point 3, the appellant may note that once the RTI Act, 2005 and other RTI rules are displayed on the public domain viz., Website of CIC, the requested information is no longer under control of a Public Authority and therefore CPIO is not bound to provide such information under RTI Act, 2005. In respect of Point-5, CPIO may revisit the RTI request and provide the information as available in the records. V. The appeal is being disposed of accordingly. NA
2148 CICOM/A/E/21/00127 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 30-06-2021 I. The applicant vide RTI application No. CICOM/R/E/21/00572 dated 25.06.2021 had sought information as under: “Khadi village industries commission (KVIC) has refused to furnish information when asked - From which source has the motto (written in sanskrit) of KVIC logo been taken? I have asked KVIC about upnishad or epic or purana name etc from where the motto was taken. Since they refused to answer, I wish to ask CIC that such information can be asked from any department under section 4 of chapter-II of RTI act?” II. Shri Ram Kumar, CPIO, CIC had given reply online on 29.06.2021 stating that the desired information is not available in CIC. III. In his First Appeal dated 30.06.2021, the Appellant, inter alia, mentioned that CIC had refused to answer. IV. The First Appeal petition, RTI application and reply given by the CPIO have been seen. The reply of CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no intervention is required in this matter. V. The appeal is being disposed of accordingly. NA
2149 CICOM/A/E/21/00123 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 28-06-2021 I. The applicant vide RTI application No. CICOM/R/E/21/00452 dated 17.05.2021 had sought information as under: “1. Audio recording of the proceedings (case No.CIC/CICOM/C/2019/ 133037 held on 11.05.2021. 2. Copy of the DAK received at CIC which has diarised on 13.05.2021 with diary no.617982, 617883 & 617884 as I have been informed via email from no-reply@nic.in .” II. Shri A.K.Assija, CPIO, CIC had given reply online on 11.06.2021 in respect of point-1 stating that no audio recording of the proceedings in respect of the hearing of the cases are maintained at Central Information Commission, therefore, the same cannot be provided. Shri R.Sitarama Murthy, CPIO, CIC had given reply online on 30.06.2021 in respect of point-2 mentioning that an automated system sends emails whenever link papers are uploaded in the relevant case(s). The CPIO also offered for inspection by the relevant files, if applicant so wishes. III. In his First Appeals dated 28.06.2021, the Appellant, inter alia, mentioned “refused access to information requested” and reiterated to provide requested information. IV. The First Appeal petitions, RTI application and replies given by the CPIOs have been seen. As regards Point-1, the reply of the CPIO is correct. As far as Point-2 is concerned, the CPIO informed the reason for getting email intimation by the applicant and also offered inspection of the relevant files. Therefore, no intervention is required in this matter. V. The appeal is being disposed of accordingly. NA
2150 CICOM/A/E/21/00124 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 28-06-2021 I. The applicant vide RTI application No. CICOM/R/E/21/00471 dated 25.05.2021 had sought information as under: “Copy of the DAK received which has been diarised on 25.05.2021 with diary no.619850, 619851 & 619852 in case no. CIC/BKOIN/A/2017/609502, CIC/BKOIN/A/2017/608199 and CIC/BKOIN/A/2018/609292 respectively. I have been informed via email from no-reply@nic.in .” II. Shri R.Sitarama Murthy, CPIO, CIC had given reply online on 30.06.2021 mentioning that an automated system sends emails whenever link papers are uploaded in the relevant case(s). The CPIO also offered for inspection of the relevant files, if applicant so wishes. III. In his First Appeal dated 28.06.2021, the Appellant, inter alia, mentioned “No Response within the Time Limit” and reiterated to provide requested information. IV. The First Appeal petition, RTI application and reply given by the CPIO have been seen. The CPIO informed the reason for getting of email intimation by the applicant and also offered inspection of the relevant files. Therefore, no intervention is required in this matter. V. The appeal is being disposed of accordingly. NA