| SNo. |
Registration No |
Appellate Authority Name |
Received date |
Reply Appeal |
Reply Doc |
| 2341 |
CICOM/A/E/20/00237 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
30-11-2020 |
1. On going through the RTI Application, the reply sent by the CPIO and the First Appeal filed by the Appellant, it is observed that the Appellant in his RTI Application No. CICOM/R/E/20/00901 mentioned that “now a days ICs are giving decisions and discouraging Appellants/Complainants and not to flood Public Authorities with RTI Applications. I have gone though a decision of Mrs. Vanaja N Sarana in a complaint filed by Mr. Varun Krishna†and asked for the following information:-
1. Number of RTI applications filed by any particular person during particular period of time which will be termed as flooding of RTI Applications (All ICs wise separately).
2. Section of the RTI Act which prohibits any person to file a particular number of RTI applications.
2. In response to the above RTI Application, Sh. Ashok Kumar Assija, CPIO has provided the following point wise information:-
1. No such information is maintained by the registry of IC(VN).
2. You may refer to the RTI Act in this regard.
3. It is worth mentioning that as per the provision of 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. He is also not required to interpret information or decision of CIC. Hence, the reply sent by the CPIO, CIC is factual and per the provision of RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. |
NA |
| 2342 |
CICOM/A/E/20/00238 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
30-11-2020 |
1. The Appellant through his RTI Application No. CICOM/R/E/20/00875 has asked for the following information related to CIC order No CIC/DTGHS/C/2018/160782:-
1. A certified a copy of the said written submission dated 04.09.2020 by the respondent PIO in the present matter.
2. A digital copy of the said written submission via email to pankaj@taxilalab.com.
2. In response to the above RTI Application, Sh. R. P. Grover, CPIO has provided the following point wise information:-
1. Total number of the pages for written submission is 29, so amount of Rs.58 be deposited in the commission.
2. Copy of the submission has been mailed on 12.11.20 at 01.31PM from the mail id of ram.p56@gov.in
3. In the First Appeal petition, Appellant has mentioned that “PIO has mentioned that I need to pay Rs 58 to the CIC for obtaining certified copy but has not mentioned how to make this payment. I pray that I be informed how I can make this payment and I have received the said email. However, the scans of the pages 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 24, 26, 27 are not very clear†and requested to provide clear scan pages through his email.
4. It is observed that the reply given by Sh. R. P. Grover is as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 and mode of payment for RTI matters is available in RTI Rules, 2012 and anybody can get it from public domain. However, as per request of the Appellant and in the view of spirit of RTI Act, direction is given to CPIO, Sh. R. P. Grover to provide the mode of payment and clear copies of above mentioned pages, if available. |
NA |
| 2343 |
CICOM/A/E/20/00234 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
29-11-2020 |
1. On going through the RTI Application, the reply sent by the CPIO and the First Appeal petition filed by the Appellant, it is observed that the Appellant has asked for the following information through his Online RTI application No. CICOM/R/E/20/00913:-
1. List of cases registered in July 2018 but are pending for disposal as on current date of RTI by the registry of IC Vanaja Sarna.
2. Grounds available in record based upon which hearing of cases mentioned at S.No. 1 are delayed as per section 4.1.b.iv. of CIC.
3. Name and designation of the official accountable as per S.No.2.
4. Documentary proof proving that the concerned DR did not have any mala-fide intention to harass the applicant/complainant by deliberately delaying the hearing of the cases.
2. In response to the above RTI Application, Sh. Ashok Kumar Assija, CPIO has provided the following point wise information:-
1. No such list is maintained by the registry. The pending list of the Commission is available on the website of the Commission.i.e. https://dsscic.nic.in/cause-list-report-web/view-pending-cases.
2. No such information is available on record in the registry.
3. No such information is available on record in the registry.
4. No such information is available on record in the registry.
3. It is worth mentioning that as per the provision of 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. It is also mentioning that as per decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of Registrar of Companies & Ors vs. Dharemendra Kumar Garg &Ors [W.P. (C) 11271/2009], 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’. Hence, the reply provided by the CPIO, CIC is factual and as per the provision of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. |
NA |
| 2344 |
CICOM/A/E/20/00235 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
29-11-2020 |
1. On going through the RTI Application, the reply sent by the CPIO and the First Appeal petition filed by the Appellant, it is observed that the Appellant has asked for the following information through his Online RTI application No. CICOM/R/E/20/00908:-
1. List of cases registered in 2018 by applicant and complainant Varun Krishna which are pending for hearing as on current date of RTI by the registry of IC Vanaja Sarna.
2. Grounds available in record based upon which hearing of cases mentioned at S.No. 1 are delayed as per section 4.1.b.iv. of CIC.
3. Name and designation of the official accountable as per S.No.2.
4. Documentary proof proving that the concerned DR did not have any mala-fide intention to harass the applicant/complainant by deliberately delaying the hearing of the cases.
2. In response to the above RTI Application, Sh. Ashok Kumar Assija, CPIO has provided the following point wise information:-
1. No such list is maintained by the registry. The pending list of the Commission is available on the website of the Commission.i.e. https://dsscic.nic.in/cause-list-report-web/view-pending-cases.
2. No such information is available on record in the registry.
3. No such information is available on record in the registry.
4. No such information is available on record in the registry.
3. It is worth mentioning that as per the provision of 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. It is also mentioning that as per decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of Registrar of Companies & Ors vs. Dharemendra Kumar Garg &Ors [W.P. (C) 11271/2009], 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’. Hence, the reply provided by the CPIO, CIC is factual and as per the provision of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. |
NA |
| 2345 |
CICOM/A/P/20/00111 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
27-11-2020 |
Please see the file. |
 |
| 2346 |
CICOM/A/E/20/00233 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
26-11-2020 |
1. On going through the RTI Application, the reply sent by the CPIO and the First Appeal filed by the Appellant, it is observed that the Appellant through his online RTI Application No. CICOM/R/E/20/00897 has asked for the certified copy of the decision No. CIC/MA/A/2008/01117.
2. In response to the above RTI Application, Sh. R. P. Grover, CPIO has provided the information stating that “the record related to appeal No. CIC/MA/A/2008/01117 is available in PDF format in APPCOMS system of the Commission. But copy of the decision dated 14.10.2020 is not available in that file. As such information can not be provided. However you may inspect the record with prior arrangement with the concern Dy. Registrar of the Commissionâ€.
3. The CPIO, Shri R P Grover, in his comments on First Appeal, has intimated the undersigned that “on rechecking it was found that the decision dated 14.07.2010 on the said appeal is available on website of the Commission under the section “old decisionâ€. He has also intimated that “a copy of decision downloaded from the website of the Commission also sent to the applicant by revised reply on 21.12.2020â€.
4. It is worth mentioning that as per decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of Registrar of Companies & Ors vs. Dharemendra Kumar Garg &Ors [W.P. (C) 11271/2009], 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’. However, the CPIO, Sh. R P Grover is hereby cautioned to be more careful while responding to RTI request in future. |
NA |
| 2347 |
CICOM/A/P/20/00106 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
25-11-2020 |
please see the file. |
|
| 2348 |
CICOM/A/P/20/00107 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
25-11-2020 |
Please see the file. |
|
| 2349 |
CICOM/A/P/20/00108 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
25-11-2020 |
Please see the file. |
|
| 2350 |
CICOM/A/P/20/00109 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
25-11-2020 |
Please see the file. |
|