| SNo. |
Registration No |
Appellate Authority Name |
Received date |
Reply Appeal |
Reply Doc |
| 3261 |
CICOM/A/2018/00222 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
19-09-2018 |
please see the file |
 |
| 3262 |
CICOM/A/2018/00218 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
19-09-2018 |
please see the file |
|
| 3263 |
CICOM/A/2018/00219 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
19-09-2018 |
please see the file |
|
| 3264 |
CICOM/A/2018/60148 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
18-09-2018 |
In the RTI application, appellant has sought video recording of hearing proceeding held at NIC studio, Mumbai in case F.No.CIC/YA/C/2015/900281. CPIO, Shri R.P. Grover has replied that “video recording of the case is not done in the Commission.â€
On perusal of the RTI application, CPIO’s reply and appeal, it is observed that the CPIO has provided factual information, therefore, no intervention is required on the part of the FAA. |
NA |
| 3265 |
CICOM/A/2018/60147 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
18-09-2018 |
In the appeal, appellant has stated that CPIO has provided incomplete, misleading and false information and thus the CPIO has refused to provide the information sought but he has not mentioned as to how the information provided is incomplete, misleading and false.
On perusal of the RTI application and CPIO’s reply, it is observed that CPIO has provided point-wise factual information to the appellant. However on Point 5 & 6, it is further to add that no specific time period has been prescribed for deciding 2nd Appeals/Complaint in the RTI Act.
In view of the above, no further intervention is required on the part of the FAA, in the matter. |
NA |
| 3266 |
CICOM/A/2018/60146 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
16-09-2018 |
please see the file |
|
| 3267 |
CICOM/A/2018/00216 |
MEENA BALIMANE SHARMA |
14-09-2018 |
Please see attachment. |
|
| 3268 |
CICOM/A/2018/00217 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
14-09-2018 |
please see the file |
|
| 3269 |
CICOM/A/2018/60145 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
13-09-2018 |
On perusal of the RTI application, CPIO’s reply and submission made in the appeal, it is observed that reply furnished by the CPIO seems to be appropriate, therefore, no intervention is required on the part of the FAA, in the matter. |
NA |
| 3270 |
CICOM/A/2018/60144 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
13-09-2018 |
On perusal of the RTI application, CPIO’s reply and submissions made in the appeal, it seems that the appellant is aggrieved with the decisions/non-receipt of decisions on his 03 RTI applications and first appeal filed in the public authorities DoPT and NCFBC and intend to file 2nd appeal/Complaint in the Commission. It is further to clarify that FAA of the Commission has no authority over the CPIOs/PIOs of the other public authorities such as DoPT and NCFBC. Hence, appellant is advised to file 2nd Appeal/Complaint in the Commission as advised by CPIO (RTI Cell) vide his reply dated 28.08.2018. The appellant may also file his Second Appeal Or Complaint through online portal of the Commission under link https://dsscic.nic.in/online-appeal-application/onlineappealapplication. |
NA |