| SNo. |
Registration No |
Appellate Authority Name |
Received date |
Reply Appeal |
Reply Doc |
| 3111 |
CICOM/A/2019/00013 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
23-01-2019 |
please see the file |
 |
| 3112 |
CICOM/A/2019/60017 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
23-01-2019 |
On perusal of the RTI application, CPIO’s reply and appeal, it is observed that the appellant had sent e-mail to CIC Administrator feedback-cic@gov.in and fdesk-cic@gov.in, which are not the official I/D of the Public Grievance Officer of the Commission, therefore, there is no infirmity in the reply of the CPIO. However, the matter has been enquired from the concerned section who informed that a letter with the subject “Grievances regarding disposal of my Second Appeal F.No.CIC/YA/A/2015/000527†was received in feedback-cic@gov.in and now forwarded to the official email I/D sp.beck@nic.in of JS(Admn)/Public Grievance Officer. Direction is accordingly given to Shri Sushil Kumar, CPIO & DS(Admn) to provide status of the aforementioned email by taking assistance u/s 5(4) from JS(Admn)/Public Grievance Officer to the appellant within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
The appellant is advised to send e-mail to the email I/D of the concerned officer only so that timely action may be initiated. Email I/D of all officers is available in the CIC’s website under link https://cic.gov.in/contact. |
NA |
| 3113 |
CICOM/A/2019/60016 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
21-01-2019 |
please see the file |
|
| 3114 |
CICOM/A/2019/60014 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
21-01-2019 |
On perusal of the RTI application, CPIO’s reply and appeal, it is observed that CPIO has provided factual information as per record available with him, therefore, no further intervention is required on the part of the FAA, in the matter. |
NA |
| 3115 |
CICOM/A/2019/60015 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
21-01-2019 |
On perusal of the RTI application, CPIO’s reply and appeal, it is observed that CPIO had rightly invoked Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act as information sought by appellant of individual Information Commissioner was personal in nature and cannot be disclosed in the light of Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment dated 31.08.2017 in Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009 C.S. Shyam vs Canara Bank.
In view of the above, no further intervention is required on the part of the FAA, in the matter. |
NA |
| 3116 |
CICOM/A/2019/60013 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
18-01-2019 |
please see the file |
|
| 3117 |
CICOM/A/2019/60012 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
18-01-2019 |
please see the file |
|
| 3118 |
CICOM/A/2019/00012 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
15-01-2019 |
please see the file |
|
| 3119 |
CICOM/A/2019/00011 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
15-01-2019 |
please see the file |
|
| 3120 |
CICOM/A/2019/60011 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
15-01-2019 |
On perusal of the RTI application, CPIO’s reply and appeal, it is observed that point-wise factual information has been furnished by the CPIO, therefore, no further intervention is required on the part of the FAA, in the matter. |
NA |