| 251 |
CICOM/A/E/25/00012 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
09-01-2025 |
Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/24/01600
GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL:
“Most respectfully, the following submissions are placed for your kind consideration: 1) Vide RTI Application No CICOM/R/E/24/01600 dated 04/12/2024, I had sought information from the CPIO, Central Information Commission(CIC). The RTI request was based on a communication dated 14.08.2024 received from the DOPT. A copy of the communication (Annexure E) was also enclosed to exclude ambiguity. Copy of the RTI Application is not enclosed for the sake of brevity.
2) The Ld CPIO & SO, Sh Chandan Kumar promptly refused the entire information. While refusing the entire information it was stated “ The Complaint received from DOPT vide OM No 23011/2024/P G Cell dated 14th August, 2024 was dealt as per Commissions Complaint Policy(Copy is enclosed)†. A copy of the Office Order dated 23.09.2016 issued by Joint Secretary(Admn) was also enclosed. Copy of the CPIO response dated 30.12.2024 is not enclosed for the sake of brevity.
3) At the outset it is made clear that the enclosed document is an Office Order and not a Complaint Policy of the Commission, as claimed by the CPIO. Thus, the Office Order dated 23.09.2016 is irrelevant and cannot be accepted as a substitute for requested information.â€
“….16) It is noteworthy to mention that while forwarding the Complaint, the DOPT was pleased to direct the Commission to provide an interim reply in case the redressal of the Complaint requires more than 30 days. Inspite of unambiguous directions, no information is received till date but for the instant RTI request. The approach of the CPIO amounts to violation of Sec.4(2) of the RTI Act.
17) In the interest of justice, it is humbly prayed:
a)To kindly direct the CPIO to provide inspection of parawise information, at the earliest.
b)To kindly grant an opportunity of Personal Hearing, in consonance with the decision passed by this Hon’ble Commission in F No CIC/CICOM/A/2022/141609 dated 26.02.2024.
c)To kindly direct the CPIO to upload the Office Order dated 23.09.2016 on the website of the CIC, in terms of obligations cast by Sec.4(1)(b) of the RTI Act,2005. The weblink may kindly be shared with the Appellant.
d)To kindly adjudicate the instant FA in terms of Sec.19(5) of the RTI Act and pass speaking orders as directed by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CWP17672-2023 titled Rajwinder Singh Vs State of Punjab.
e)Any other measure, your honour deems fit & proper, in the interest of corruption free governance and to protect the fundamental rights of informed citizenryâ€
DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY:
The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused.
In the instant appeal, the appellant had requested for personal hearing of the first appeal to which a hearing was scheduled on 06.02.2025 at 12:00 noon via Bharat VC conference. Both the appellant and the CPIO were present in the hearing via VC mode. All the submissions made by the appellant were considered during the decision on the first appeal.
The pointwise disposal of the First Appeal as per the grounds of appeal of the appellant is as follows:-
• The Office Order No. 34/02/2016-CIC/Admn dt. 23.09.2016 given by the CPIO in the reply of the RTI application is the Commission’s Complaint Policy which was approved in the Commission’s Meeting.
• Inspection of the document/file cannot be given as it is already mentioned in the Complaint Policy of the Commission
“iii) The complaint thus maintained shall not be available for inspection as it qualifies as a personal information within the meaning of provision of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.â€
• It is the prerogative of the public authority to decide as to what documents are to be uploaded under section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act, 2005 on its website.
Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly. |
NA |
| 260 |
CICOM/A/E/25/00011 |
Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI |
08-01-2025 |
The Online First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. As per Section 2 (f) of the 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 collate information that is not a part of the record. Accordingly, the reply given by the CPIO is appropriate and as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, no intervention is required on behalf of the FAA in this matter. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. |
NA |
