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
2291 CICOM/A/P/21/00011 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 20-01-2021 Please see the file. download pdf
2292 CICOM/A/P/21/00009 MEENA BALIMANE SHARMA 19-01-2021 Please see the file. download pdf
2293 CICOM/A/E/21/00007 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 18-01-2021 I. The appellant had requested the following information vide online RTI application No.CICOM/R/E/20/01066 dated 26.12.2020. 1. Provide certified copies of file noting, orders, minutes of meeting, Action taken Report, correspondences and communications made (till the date of reply of this RTI application) along with minutes of meetings held, relating to the implementation of direction of Hon’ble CIC in Subhash Chandra Aggarwal and Ors. vs. Indian National Congress/All India Congress Committee and Ors. (MANU/CI/0068/2013) dated 03.06.2013. 2. What are the Steps taken by CIC in Order to have a check whether its orders are being enforced or not 3. Are there any powers conferred to CIC to take any Action (as in present Case) where the Order is not enforced despite a long time gap of 7 Years. II. The CPIO Shri Ram Kumar has given the following reply on 12.01.2021. “.....the file number written by you in your RTI application is not found in the Commission’s website. Kindly provide actual file number so that sought for information can be given to you.” III. The appellant in his First Appeal dated 18.01.2021 has mentioned as under: “The information was rejected on the ground that file number written by me was not found. ......... File number for your convenience is provided as follows: File No.CIC/SM/C/2011/001386 and File No.CIC/SM/C/2011/000838. Please provide the information Point wise.” IV. Shri Ram Kumar, CPIO is directed to provide the required information within 15 days to the Appellate. V. The appeal is being disposed of accordingly. NA
2294 CICOM/A/E/21/00006 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 17-01-2021 1. अपीलकर्ता द्वारा ऑनलाइन आर.टी.आई. आवेदन सं. CICOM/R/E/20/01047 के माध्येम से निम्न लिखित सूचना मांगी गई थी:- 1. पत्र संख्या CIC/penalty/2018/CR-2/00506/157 दिनांक 16.04.2018 पर हुई कार्रवाई की सूचना दें । 2. CPIO द्वारा पेनल्टीं नहीं चुकाने पर CIC द्वारा रिकवरी करने के लिए कार्रवाई करने की शक्तियों/नियमों/प्रावधानों की सूचना दें । 3. प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी का नाम, पता, लैंड लाइन तथा मोबाइल नंबर और इमेल आईडी दें। 2. उक्त आर.टी.आई. आवेदन के प्रतिउत्तर में श्री राम कुमार, केन्द्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी, केन्द्रीय रजिस्ट्री -।। द्वारा बिन्दुवार निम्नलिखित सूचनाएं उपलब्ध करवाई गई:- 1. इस केस में आयोग द्वारा संबंधित विभाग को दो अनुस्माारक दिनांक 06.12.2018 एवं 11.01.2021 को जारी किए गए । 2. इस प्रकार की सूचना रिकार्ड में उपलब्ध नहीं है । 3. श्रीमती मीना बलिमने शर्मा, प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी, केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग, बाबा गंगनाथ मार्ग, मुनिरका, नई दिल्ली – 110067 । 011-26162290, as-cic@nic.in 3. अपीलकर्ता ने आर.टी.आई. आवेदन के बिंदु सं. 1 एवं 2 के संदर्भ में प्रदान की गई सूचना से संतुष्‍ट नहीं होने पर प्रथम अपील दाखिल की है तथा अनुरोध किया है कि CPIO को सही सूचना देने के लिए आदेश दें । 4. आर.टी.आई. आवेदन, प्रदान की गई सूचना एवं प्रथम अपील आवेदन का अवलोकन करने पर पाया गया कि अपीलकर्ता द्वारा आर.टी.आई. आवेदन के बिंदु सं. 1 एवं 2 में जो सूचना मांगी गई थी, श्री राम कुमार, केन्द्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी, केन्द्रीय रजिस्ट्री -।। द्वारा प्रदान कर दी गई है तथा बिंदु सं. 3 के तहत प्रदान की गई सूचना के संदर्भ में केन्द्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी ने अपनी लिखित टिपपणी में उल्लेरख किया है कि ‘प्रदान की गई सूचना में ईमेल आई.डी. as-cic@nic.in भूलवश टंकित हो गया है । प्रथम अपील आवेदन सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम, 2005 की धारा 19 (1) के प्रावधानों के तहत पत्राचार द्वारा अथवा ऑनलाइन माध्यूम से ही किया जाना अपेक्षित है’। केन्द्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा प्रदान की गई सूचना, सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम, 2005 के प्रावधानों के अनुसार ही है, अत: इसमें प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी के हस्तक्षेप की कोई आवश्यवकता नहीं है । NA
2295 CICOM/A/E/21/00005 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 15-01-2021 I. The appellant had requested the following information vide online RTI application dated 31.12.2020. Copy of affidavit or explanation or written submission received from CPIO, New India Assurance Company Ltd., RTI Cell, Mumbai-400001 relating to Commission’s decision in F.No. CIC/NIACL/A/2019/639064. II. The CPIO Shri SC Sharma has given the following reply on 14.01.2021. “Point-1: Written submission dated 23.12.2020 received from CPIO in respect of case no. CIC/NIACL/A/2019/639064, copy of which was also marked to you by CPIO, is however, enclosed.” III. The appellant in his First Appeal dated 15.01.2021 has mentioned that he has not received the attachment of written submission dated 23.12.2020. IV. Shri SC Sharma, CPIO is directed to provide the written submission dated 23.12.2020 immediately to the Appellate. He is advised to be careful in sending attachments, in future. V. The appeal is being disposed of accordingly. NA
2296 CICOM/A/E/21/00004 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 13-01-2021 I. The appellant had requested the following clarification vide online RTI application dated 12.01.2021. “What parameters are considered for issuing OBC non-creamy layer certificate. As our parent is a Group-C worker in state government in Karnataka and income exceeds 8 lakh rupees. Am I eligible to get OBC non-creamy layer certificate as my caste falls under OBC list released by central government.” II. The CPIO Shri Ram Kumar has given the following reply on 12.01.2021. “Central Information Commission does not have the information. You may approach the concerned Public Authority. Central Information Commission is the second appellate authority for the RTIs filed with Ministries/Departments under Central Government and UTs of India and has no jurisdiction over any matters related to State Government.” III. The appellant in his First Appeal dated 13.01.2021 has reiterated his request for the said clarification. IV. On perusal of the First Appeal petition, RTI application and reply given by the CPIO, it is observed that Shri Ram Kumar, CPIO, CIC has already provided the requisite information as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. V. The appeal is being disposed of accordingly. NA
2297 CICOM/A/E/21/00003 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 08-01-2021 I. The appellant had submitted an online RTI application on 01.12.2020to DoPT, who forwarded the same to CIC on 08.12.2020 to provide information/reply to questions no. 4,7,10 & 11. The said four questions are reproduced below. “When the CIC has declared six national political parties as public authority, no one can take a position contrary to that unless the order of the CIC has been overturned by the Supreme Court or High Courts. Q4A) Please provide the status of this order as on today. Q4B) If there is a deviation, details of action taken by DoPT? 7) Please provide the following details for the years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-21 Year wise details needed: Application, Appeal, Show cause, No. of penalty cases, No. of Compensation cases. 10) Please provide the following details for the years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-21 Details of annual reports (including date of receipt for each year) received from CIC year wise for the above mentioned years. 11) Please provide the following details for the years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-21 1) Details of annual reports placed (date of lying) before each house of parliament for each year received from CIC year wise for the above mentioned years. 2) Please provide the details of discussion if any for each year.” II. The CPIO Shri Ram Kumar has given the following reply on 06.01.2021. QUOTE On perusal of your RTI application, it is observed that the information asked for is of various nature and pertains to the different sections of CIC. In this regard, it is worth mentioning here that the CIC in its decision No.CIC/WB/A/2008/01256 dated 18.07.2008 (Wasi-ul-Hquaue Vs. UPSC) has held, “..... as per section 6(1) read with section 7(1) of the Act, a request means that the questions and the answers must share an embryonic relationship, the genus of the application must be one and sub questions can constitute different species of the same genus.” So if you wish to get any information, you are requested to file Application separately for different types of information. UNQUOTE III. The appellant in his First Appeal dated 08.01.2021 has requested to instruct PIO to give complete information as requested in his RTI application. IV. The undersigned have examined the questions 4, 7, 10 & 11 of the RTI application, the reply sent by the CPIO and the First Appeal petition. Shri Ram Kumar, CPIO is hereby directed to revisit the reply given and to provide to the Appellant whatever information available with the Commission in respect of Q.4, 7, 10 & 11 in the form of soft copies, within 10 days from the date of receipt of this decision. V. The appeal is being disposed of accordingly. NA
2298 CICOM/A/P/21/00001 AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE 07-01-2021 Please see the file. download pdf
2299 CICOM/A/P/21/00004 AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE 07-01-2021 Please see the attachment. download pdf
2300 CICOM/A/P/21/00005 AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE 07-01-2021 Please see the attachment. download pdf