| SNo. |
Registration No |
Appellate Authority Name |
Received date |
Reply Appeal |
Reply Doc |
| 2261 |
CICOM/A/E/21/00024 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
11-02-2021 |
I. The information sought vide online RTI Application dated 22.04.2018 regarding CIC Mobile App Version 1.0 released on 06.03.2018, and point-wise reply by Shri Jeewan Chandra, CPIO(MR) are as under.
Point-1:- Technical evaluation committee decision & price bid comparison chart for awarding of Tender.
Point-2:- Technical specifications agreed with the vender for the development of Registration process, Vendor’s compliance report along with copies of documented successful Test cases pertaining to registration process from the Vendor.
Point-3:- Documentary proof from vendor that Software Development Life Cycle was followed by the Vendor before delivering the Mobile App.
Point-4:- Name and Designation of the official from CIC responsible for testing before approving its launch. Please also provide the completed successful documented test cases before its launch along with copy of approval/ acceptance letter or certificate.
Reply to Points- 1 to 4:- For getting information on these points you may inspect the concern file. In this connection, you can visit to CIC on any working day within office hours.
Point-5:- Number of users who have registered till date along with their registered Names and Date of birth (with year).
Point-6:- List of known CIC officials who are able to successfully register with Mobile App with their correct Date of birth.
Point-7:- Details of all feedbacks or reported bugs received from users with regards to improvement along with action taken report by the CIC official.
Reply to Points- 5 to 7:- The information sought against these cannot be provided.
Point-8:- File notings pertaining to my RTI dated 22.04.2018.
Reply to Point-8:- As mentioned against points 1 to 4 above.
II. Ground of First Appeal:- The PIO is obstructing all the information deliberately, knowingly and with the mala-fide intentions. The PIO be directed to provide the information. Delay if any caused may please be condoned due to extraneous reasons.
III. FAA Decision with reasons:- On perusal of the First Appeal petition, RTI application and reply given by the CPIO, it is observed that the CPIO has provided an opportunity to inspect relevant file(s) of the instant case. But the Appellant didn’t avail this opportunity so far. Therefore the statement of the appellant that the PIO is obstructing all the information deliberately, knowingly and with the mala-fide intentions, is not acceptable. Appellant has submitted First Appeal after 33 months of reply given by the CPIO-CIC, instead of submitting within 30 days of RTI reply as per provisions of the RTI Act 2005, and has requested to condone the delay due to extraneous reasons which he has not specified and hence the request is not acceded to. Therefore, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter.
IV. The appeal is being disposed off accordingly. |
NA |
| 2262 |
CICOM/A/P/21/00024 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
10-02-2021 |
Please see the file. |
 |
| 2263 |
CICOM/A/P/21/00025 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
10-02-2021 |
Please see the file. |
|
| 2264 |
CICOM/A/E/21/00023 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
10-02-2021 |
I. The information sought vide online RTI Application dated 01.01.2021:-
The provision or section of RTI Act 2005 or any Rules, which power the Hon’ble CIC used to change/reverse its earlier order dated 08.08.2019.
II. Online reply dated 29.01.2021 by Shri R. Sitarama Murthy, CPIO:-
“You are seeking not any information but asking the opinion/ clarification of the CPIO on the provisions of RTI Act. Since, this does not come within the definition of ‘information’ u/s 2(h) of RTI Act, the CPIO is not required to answer.â€
III. Ground of First Appeal:- The Appellant stated that the CPIO provided Incomplete, misleading or false information.
IV. FAA Decision with reasons:- On perusal of the First Appeal petition, RTI application and reply given by the CPIO, the CPIO’s reply is factual and as per the provisions of the RTI Act 2005. Therefore no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter.
V. The appeal is being disposed off accordingly. |
NA |
| 2265 |
CICOM/A/E/21/00022 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
08-02-2021 |
I. The RTI applicant, vide his online application no. CICOM/R/E/20/01080 dated 21.12.2020 had requested for the following information in respect of his two complaints addressed to CIC and Secretary-CIC which were sent by speed post.
1. Diary numbers of the Complaints received.
2. If, Dak has not been diarised, recorded reason for not being diarised.
3. Date on which Chief Information Commissioner saw the compliant.
4. Date on which Secretary, CIC saw the compliant.
5. Date of Chief Information Commissioner/Secretary, CIC ordered investigation based on contents in the complaint.
6. Name of the person and designation of CIC official whom Chief Information Commissioner /Secretary ordered, to investigate the complaint.
7. Copy of report prepared by CIC officials after investigation in respect of complaint, if any.
8. Copy of report prepared by any person other than CIC officials after investigation in respect of complaint, if any.
9. Action taken by Chief Information Commissioner/Secretary, CIC after receipt of reports mentioned in Para 7 and 8.
10. In respect of email complaint to Secretary, provide information about action taken by Secretary CIC on e-mail relating to complaint, if any.
II. Reply dated 08.02.2021 of Shri C.Vinod Babu, CPIO :-
RTI REPLY 1&2 : Two letters dated 05.12.2020 received and diarized on 10.12.2020 vide Dy.Nos. E-31167 & E-31169.
RTI REPLY 3-10: Above said Complaints of Shri Amresh Chandra dated 05.12.2020 addressed to Chief Information Commissioner and Secretary are under process hence action taken cannot be provided.
III. Grounds for online Appeal dated 08.02.2021:-
“There is no response from CPIOs of Central Information Commission till dateâ€.
IV. FAA Decision with reasons:-
RTI application, reply of the CPIO and the First Appeal of the Appellant have been examined. Shri Vinod Babu, CPIO, CIC had issued reply dated 08.02.2021 and also uploaded a scanned copy of reply on 09.02.2021 on the RTI Portal. Therefore, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. A copy of the reply is attached for ready reference.
It is noticed that there was a delay in forwarding the RTI request by Shri Ram Kumar who is Nodal officer and CPIO-RTI Cell. He is warned to be more careful in future and directed to timely forward such RTI applications to the concerned CPIO as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.
V. The First Appeal is accordingly disposed off. |
|
| 2266 |
CICOM/A/E/21/00020 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
06-02-2021 |
I. Information sought by RTI applicant and the information furnished by Shri A.K. Assija, CPIO in respect of points 1,2,3&11 are as under :-
RTI POINT-1 : Since the January 2019 to Dec 2020 the no of second appeals and complaints received by CIC office against CPIO(s) and FAA(s) of BSNL Odisha Circle, Bhubaneswar.
RTI Reply-1: No such list is maintained by the registry of IC(VN) in regard to the second appeal/complaints filed against CPIOs/FAAs of BSNL, Odisha Circle, Bhubaneswar.
RTI POINT-2: Provide in tabular format the list number of Appeal/Complaint File no’s& Diary no’s [Jan 2019 –Dec 2020 against BSNL Odisha, Bhubaneswar]
RTI Reply-2: No such list is maintained by the registry of IC(VN) in regard to the file number and diary number of second appeal/complaints filed against CPIOs/FAAs of BSNL, Odisha Circle, Bhubaneswar.
RTI POINT-3: Please provide the Name of the Information Commissioner who pertains to my File no. CIC/BSNLD/A/2020/125399 & provide is there any way to see online about who pertains to second appeals & complaints by entering file no’s or dairy no’s.
RTI Reply-3: You have sought information with regard to the second appeal filed in the Commission vide file No. CIC/BSNLD/A/2020/125399. In this regard, it is informed you that the second appeals pertaining to the BSNL are dealt with in the Registry of Information Commissioner Smt. Vanaja N Sarma.
RTI POINT-4: Kindly provide the https://rtionline.gov.in/website official email id and phone no. for suggestions & complaints.
RTI Reply-4: This pertains to DoPT. Accordingly, your RTI Application is being transferred u/s 6(3) of the RTI Application to the DoPT.
RTI REPLY 5-10: These points pertain to BSNL, Odisha. Accordingly, your RTI Application is being transferred u/s 6(3) of the RTI Application to the BSNL, Odisha.
RTI POINT-11: Provide the Name, designation, address, official telephone number and e-mail of the CPIO concerned to this RTI application & provide the Name, designation, address, official telephone number and e-mail of the First Appellate Authority who concerned to this RTI application as per the RTI Act 2005.
Prayers:- I humbly request you to forward this application to the concerned public authority within 5 days as per 6(3) of RTI Act-2005 keeping me in loop, if in case the application does pertain to you. Kindly acknowledge the receipt. Further I request you to scan the documents on printer at 300DPI for better results. Please do not fold or staple the paper before scanning.
RTI Reply-11: You have sought the name, designation, and other information in regard to the CPIO concerned and FAA of CIC. In this connection, it is informed you that the points No. 1-3 and 11 pertains to the registry of IC(VN). Required details viz, name, designation, official telephone, and e-mail are as under:
1. CPIO: Mr A K Assija, Deputy Registrar to IC(VN) and CPIO, Tele.-26182594, dricvn@cic.nic.in. Address- Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi- 110067
2. FAA: Mrs. Meena Balimane Sharma, Additional Secretary and FAA Tele.- 26162290 E-mail ID- as-cic@nic.in. Address- Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi- 110067.
III. Grounds for Appeal:-
The Appellant has advanced the following grounds for his appeal.
“(a) In response to my RTI request The CPIOs has provided Incomplete & misleading information.
(b) The RTI Query No.1&2 was not given and the reply is completely misleading to the applicant. If any information not maintained by the CPIO he/she should send the same to different department u/s 6(3) or get the same information as per the act.
(c) The Q.3 “Please provide the Name of the Information Commissioner who pertains to my File no.CIC/BSNLD/A/2020/125399 & provide is there any way to see online about who pertains to second appeals & complaints by entering file no’s or dairy no’s†reply was not given completely so it’s incomplete information.
PRAYERS OR RELIEF SOUGHT:
(a) To direct the CPIOs to provide truthful point wise complete and correct information with official Seal & Signature, those are sought in my RTI application free of cost under section 7(6) of RTI Act, 2005 and pass order to provide information within 7days from the date of receipt of the order of the FAA or a fixed time limit as decided by FAA.
(b) Any other action the First Appellate Authority may take which is deemed appropriate.
IV. FAA Decision with reasons:-
As the Appellant has rightly mentioned, replies of CPIO in respect of point-1&2 are incomplete and misleading. Information furnished against point-3 with regard to online verification of Appeal/Complaint, is also incomplete.
The CPIO is directed to revisit his replies with respect to 1, 2, & 3 and furnish complete information, as requested by the Appellant.
V. The First Appeal is accordingly disposed off. |
NA |
| 2267 |
CICOM/A/P/21/00022 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
05-02-2021 |
Please see the file. |
|
| 2268 |
CICOM/A/P/21/00023 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
05-02-2021 |
Please see the attachment. |
|
| 2269 |
CICOM/A/E/21/00019 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
05-02-2021 |
I. RTI Application No.CICOM/R/E/21/00128 dated 30.01.2021:-
The Applicant has requested the following information -
1)Audio and Video of entire hearing of his 2nd Appeal CIC/MHOME/A/2018/125574
2)Audio and Video of entire hearing of his 2nd Appeal CIC/MHOME/A/2018/146241
II. Shri S.K. Chitkara, CPIO Reply Dated 04.02.2021:-
“It is informed that audio and video recording of the hearings is not done in CIC. Therefore, no material information can be provided to you as requested by you.â€
III. Ground of First Appeal:-
CPIO-CIC could have transferred RTI to the concerned government department keeping the records of the hearings done vide video conferencing u/s 6(3)(i)(ii) of the RTI Act, 2005.
IV. Decision with reasons:-
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, the reply sent by the CPIO, CIC is factual and as per the provisions of RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter.
V. The appeal is being disposed of accordingly. |
NA |
| 2270 |
CICOM/A/P/21/00021 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
04-02-2021 |
Please see the file. |
|