| SNo. |
Registration No |
Appellate Authority Name |
Received date |
Reply Appeal |
Reply Doc |
| 2451 |
CICOM/A/E/20/00160 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
06-09-2020 |
Ongoing through the RTI application, CPIO’s reply and First Appeal filed by the appellant, it is observed that the Appellant has asked for information regarding action taken on his non-compliance petition dated 05.11.2019 (Diary No. 153563) in respect to the 2nd Appeal Order No. CIC/DIRED/A/2017/185898 dated 03.09.2019.
The CPIO, in his reply dated 28.08.2020, informed the Appellant that “As per available record, action on your letter dated 05.11.2019 is pending. Further, compliance report from the respondent has not yet received in the Commission.†It is worth mentioning here that under the provisions of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, only such information, as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authoritycan be provided by a PIO. The current status of the petition dated 05.11.2020 has been informed by the CPIO. The Appellant may approach the concerned Registry for early disposal of his non-compliance petition separately. Hence, further intervention is not required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. |
NA |
| 2452 |
CICOM/A/E/20/00159 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
04-09-2020 |
Ongoing through the RTI application, CPIO’s reply and First Appeal filed by the appellant, it is observed that the Appellant has asked for information regarding the procedure of filling RTI Application for getting information about the current status of his complaint filed through e-mail with a government body.
The CPIO, in his reply dated 28.08.2020, advised the Appellant “to go through the RTI Act, 2005 and RTI Rules, 2012, available on public domain.†It is important to note that the procedure of filling RTI Application,1st Appeal and the Complaint or 2nd Appeal has already been mentioned in RTI Act, 2005 itself under relevant sections (6)(1),19(1) and 18 or 19(3) respectively. Further, RTI Rules, 2012, has been framed by the competent government for Central Public Authorities in this regard. RTI Act, 2005 and the RTI Rules, 2012 both are available on CIC’s website in public domain. Accordingly, the CPIO has provided factual information to the Appellant. Hence, further intervention is not required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. |
NA |
| 2453 |
CICOM/A/E/20/00158 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
01-09-2020 |
Ongoing through the RTI application, CPIO’s reply and First Appeal filed by the appellant, it is observed that the Appellant has asked for clarification in the context of whether information can be sought in lock down or not and whether any public authority can refuse to provide information or hear First Appeal on the basis that they are busy currently in lock down.
The CPIO, in his reply dated 14.08.2020, informed the Appellant that “Questions/Queries cannot be answered/clarified under RTI Act.†It is important to note that under the provisions of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, only such information, as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authoritycan be provided by a PIO.The PIO is also not required to interpret information or furnish replies to the hypothetical questions.Hence, the CPIO has replied under the provision of RTI Act, 2005 and accordingly, further intervention is not required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. |
NA |
| 2454 |
CICOM/A/E/20/00157 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
27-08-2020 |
Ongoing through the RTI application, CPIO’s reply and First Appeal filed by the appellant, it is observed that the appellant, through his RTI application, has asked for information, whether information related to non-sensitive and administrative subject along with file noting can be obtained or not from an organization, exempted u/s 24 of RTI Act, 2005.
It is important to note that under the provisions of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, only such information, as is available and existing and held by the public authority or is under control of the public authoritycan be provided by a PIO. The PIO is also not required to interpret information or furnish replies to the hypothetical questions. Whatever the Appellant has asked for, is the interpretation of section 24 of RTI Act, 2005. The CPIO is not a competent authority to interpret the law and doing so is also beyond the duty and obligation of a CPIO under RTI Act, 2005. Hence, the reply given by the CPIO is factual and as per the provision of the RTI Act, 2005. Accordingly, no further intervention is required on the part of FAA in this matter. |
NA |
| 2455 |
CICOM/A/P/20/00064 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
27-08-2020 |
Please see the file. |
 |
| 2456 |
CICOM/A/P/20/00065 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
27-08-2020 |
Please see the file. |
|
| 2457 |
CICOM/A/P/20/00067 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
27-08-2020 |
Please see the file. |
|
| 2458 |
CICOM/A/P/20/00068 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
27-08-2020 |
Please see the file. |
|
| 2459 |
CICOM/A/P/20/00069 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
27-08-2020 |
Please see the file. |
|
| 2460 |
CICOM/A/P/20/00070 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
27-08-2020 |
Please see the file. |
|