| SNo. |
Registration No |
Appellate Authority Name |
Received date |
Reply Appeal |
Reply Doc |
| 3061 |
CICOM/A/2019/60032 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
22-02-2019 |
please see the file |
 |
| 3062 |
CICOM/A/2019/60033 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
22-02-2019 |
In the appeal, appellant has stated that his RTI may be forwarded to appropriate Public Information Officer. On perusal of the RTI application, it is observed that the appellant has not mentioned the name of authority whose judgments he is asking for, therefore, it is not possible to give direction to transfer the RTI to appropriate public authority, as requested. However, if he is seeking certain decisions on certain matter of the Central Information Commission, it is to mention that all decisions of the Commission are available in the CIC’s website under link https://cic.gov.in/decision. Hence, appellant is advised to go through the link and get the information. |
NA |
| 3063 |
CICOM/A/2019/60030 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
21-02-2019 |
On perusal of the RTI application, it is observed that the appellant has not sought any information but submitted suggestions regarding online filing of 2nd appeals. The CPIO, CIC has provided link of detailed guidelines for filing 2nd appeals and Complaints through online portal. Hence, appellant is advised to go through the guidelines and file appeals/complaints accordingly. As regards suggestions for improving the online filing process is concerned, appellant is advised to submit his suggestions separately to the Commission. |
NA |
| 3064 |
CICOM/A/2019/60031 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
21-02-2019 |
On perusal of the RTI application, it is observed that on Point 1, appellant has sought reason for not action on his two grievances against CIC in PG portal and on Point 2, appellant has not sought any information but making complaint/allegation. In this regard, the matter has been enquired with Shri Rajesh Mongia, CPIO & DR to CR-II who informed that though the appellant has not mentioned any specific grievance reference number in the RTI application, however, as per record, two grievances were received from the appellant regarding rejection of his online 2nd appeals and the same was disposed of by the Commission on 13.02.2019. He further informed that as per CIC’s website, total 06 (six) 2nd appeals sent by the appellant by post, have also been registered in the Commission.
In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of. |
NA |
| 3065 |
CICOM/A/2019/00046 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
20-02-2019 |
please see the file |
|
| 3066 |
CICOM/A/2019/00044 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
20-02-2019 |
please see the file |
|
| 3067 |
CICOM/A/2019/00045 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
20-02-2019 |
please see the file |
|
| 3068 |
CICOM/A/2019/00047 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
20-02-2019 |
please see the file |
|
| 3069 |
CICOM/A/2019/60029 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
19-02-2019 |
On perusal of the RTI application, CPIO’s reply and appeal, it is observed that the appellant has not sought any information but sought comments of CPIO on the decision of the Commission. In this regard, appellant may refer to Para-6 of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi order dated 11.01.2013 in LPA No.785/2012 Hansi Rawat and Anr. Vs. Punjab National Bank and Ors, in which it was held that:-
“6. The proceedings under the RTI Act do not entail detailed adjudication of the said aspects….. the proceedings under the RTI Act cannot be converted into proceedings for adjudication of disputes as to the correctness of the information furnished.â€
Hence, reply of the CPIO is appropriate. Further to it, CPIO as well as FAA of the Commission has no authority to comment on the decision of the Commission. |
NA |
| 3070 |
CICOM/A/2019/00042 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
18-02-2019 |
please see the file |
|