| SNo. |
Registration No |
Appellate Authority Name |
Received date |
Reply Appeal |
Reply Doc |
| 3381 |
CICOM/A/2018/00157 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
04-07-2018 |
please see the file |
 |
| 3382 |
CICOM/A/2018/00154 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
04-07-2018 |
please see the file |
|
| 3383 |
CICOM/A/2018/60092 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
04-07-2018 |
please see the file |
|
| 3384 |
CICOM/A/2018/60088 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
03-07-2018 |
please see the file |
|
| 3385 |
CICOM/A/2018/60087 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
03-07-2018 |
please see the file |
|
| 3386 |
CICOM/A/2018/60089 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
03-07-2018 |
please see the file |
|
| 3387 |
CICOM/A/2018/60090 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
03-07-2018 |
please see the file |
|
| 3388 |
CICOM/A/2018/60086 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
29-06-2018 |
On perusal of the RTI application, reply of the CPIO and appeal, it is observed that information furnished on Points 5,6,8,9,11,14 by the CPIOs is appropriate as per the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment in Civil Appeal No.22 of 2009 dated 31.08.2017 C.S. Shyam vs Canara Bank and information provided on Points 10,12,13,15,16 & 17 is also found appropriate and factual, therefore, no intervention is required on the part of the FAA, in the matter. As regards non-receipt of information on Points 1-4 & 7, appellant is advised to approach the public authority ‘DoPT’ since these points were transferred by the CPIO u/s 6(3) to them. |
NA |
| 3389 |
CICOM/A/2018/60085 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
28-06-2018 |
In the RTI application, appellant has sought 8 points information in respect of case file No.CIC/POSTS/A/2017/102643 hearing of which was held on 16.04.2018. Shri T.K. Mohapatra, CPIO & DO to IC(SA) has furnished following information:-
“Point 1 & 2, in absence of the attendance sheet which is not readily available as it may have been mixed up with other documents of the registry, it is not possible to inform regarding the presence of a particular person (CPIO/Appellant) during the hearing. Point 3, no record/proceeding other than the Commissions order is available. Point 4, there is no note-sheet available. You may inspect the concerned case file and can get the documents as desired from the file. Point 5, No audio or video recording of the hearings are done by the Commission or the Commission has authorized anybody for this purpose. Point 6, no separate information available other than order available in the commission. point 7, please refer the order dated 12-03-2018.â€
On perusal of the RTI application, reply of the CPIO and appeal, it is observed that:-
1. On Points 1 & 2 of the RTI application, information provided by the CPIO is factual. However, the appellant also sought copy of the register on which she signed at the reception on 16.04.2018. Direction in this regard is given to Shri T.K. Mohapatra, CPIO & DO to IC(SA) to make fresh efforts for searching the attendance sheet on which appellant has signed on the date of hearing and also provide a copy of the page of the register at the reception of the Commission on which appellant has signed on 16.04.2018 within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
2. Information provided by the CPIO on other points of the RTI application is found appropriate. However, on Point-4, CPIO has offered inspection to the appellant but in the appeal, appellant has requested for providing the copy of the concerned case file. Direction is accordingly given to Shri Mohapatra, CPIO & DO to IC(SA) to supply copy of the case file No.CIC/POSTS/A/2017/102643 with requisite photocopy charges to the appellant within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of the order. |
NA |
| 3390 |
CICOM/A/2018/00153 |
AJITKUMAR VASANTRAO SONTAKKE |
27-06-2018 |
please see the file |
|