| SNo. |
Registration No |
Appellate Authority Name |
Received date |
Reply Appeal |
Reply Doc |
| 471 |
CICOM/A/E/24/00249 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
14-08-2024 |
Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/24/00638
GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL:
The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that
"Respected Authority, I would like to request information regarding the distribution of business flyers/leaflets in public areas, especially in Mumbai-Maharashtra. In regards to that, I would appreciate receiving the following listed information on this matter. 1) Kindly provide any legal provision & any permission required in terms of allowed or not, if available, for distribution of Business flyers/leaflets for expansion of Business, especially Sole Proprietorship firm, to the Individual in-person and/or they are kept in a Shop or on a Shop’s Shutter. 2) Please provide information on any restricted areas that prohibit the distribution of flyers/leaflets 3) Kindly provide information about the nature of businesses that are not permitted to distribute their business flyers/leaflets. Please provide the above information in the interest of public welfare to prevent any local obstacles and unwanted interference that may hinder business operations. If information asked is not related to your department, then kindly transfer automatically to the appropriate department in 5 working days from the date of receipt of application as per RTI act 2005, section 6(3)."
DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY:
The 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 |
| 472 |
CICOM/A/E/24/00245 |
Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI |
13-08-2024 |
On perusal of the online Appeal, RTI application and reply of the CPIO, it is observed that the information given by the CPIO is as per provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no further intervention is required on the part of FAA in the matter. |
NA |
| 473 |
CICOM/A/E/24/00243 |
Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI |
09-08-2024 |
On perusal of the online Appeal, RTI application and reply of the CPIO, it is observed that the information given by the CPIO is as per provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no further intervention is required on the part of FAA in the matter. |
NA |
| 474 |
CICOM/A/E/24/00241 |
Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI |
08-08-2024 |
On perusal of the online Appeal, RTI application and reply of the CPIO, it is observed that the information given by the CPIO is as per provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no further intervention is required on the part of FAA in the matter. |
NA |
| 475 |
CICOM/A/E/24/00242 |
Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI |
08-08-2024 |
On perusal of the online Appeal, RTI application and reply of the CPIO, it is observed that the information given by the CPIO is as per provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no further intervention is required on the part of FAA in the matter. |
NA |
| 476 |
CICOM/A/E/24/00240 |
Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI |
07-08-2024 |
On perusal of the online Appeal, RTI application and reply of the CPIO, it is observed that the information given by the CPIO is as per provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no further intervention is required on the part of FAA in the matter. |
NA |
| 477 |
CICOM/A/P/24/00097 |
Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI |
06-08-2024 |
Please see the file. |
 |
| 478 |
CICOM/A/P/24/00096 |
Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI |
05-08-2024 |
Please see the file. |
|
| 479 |
CICOM/A/E/24/00238 |
Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI |
04-08-2024 |
On perusal of the online Appeal, RTI application and reply of the CPIO, it is observed that the information given by the CPIO is as per provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no further intervention is required on the part of FAA in the matter. |
NA |
| 480 |
CICOM/A/E/24/00237 |
Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR |
03-08-2024 |
Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/24/00880
GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL:
The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that
"CONTEXT / PRIOR REQUESTS: On 25.02.24 I had made requests No. CICOM/R/E/24/00250 - 00255 for separate pieces of information about CIC practices of employing Legal Consultants and CPIO had conveyed that some files are untraceable. I had then made requests Nos. CICOM/R/E/24/00387 - 00392 for information relating to each CIC advertisement since 2015 for engaging Legal Consultants and CPIO had provided some information in decisions dt. 01.05.24. By letters dt. 02.05.24 in compliance of FAA decisions in matters of my requests dt. 25.02.24, CPIO had informed in 4 cases that the files were still untraced and in one case (request no. CICOM/R/E/24/00254) allowed inspection of F. No. 5/1/2012/CIC-Admn. During inspection I had identified the pages that I wished to study to decide whether or not to pursue the other cases in appeals. CPIO had agreed to provide copies of all against charges and I did not file appeals. FACTS: On 15.06.24 I made request No. CICOM/R/E/24/00880 for RTI Online payment link for copies of pages from F. No. 5/1/2012/CIC-Admn that I listed in supporting document. On 12.07.24 the present CPIO disposed of my request with online Reply saying: Relevant copies of noting part and correspondence of all 5 volumes of File No. 5/1/2012/CIC-Admn, which may be provided as information under RTI Act, 2005 is being worked out and cost will be intimated accordingly. GROUNDS: A. CPIO has not intimated charges for copies, although it is 7 weeks since I made request dt. 15.06.24 for payment link and 3 weeks since CPIO gave, instead, Reply dt. 12.07.24 saying that cost would be intimated. Strictly speaking, CPIO is required u/s 7(6) of the RTI Act to now provide the copies free of charge. However, having sought copies of a large number of pages for study purpose, I would prefer to pay. B. CPIO has mentioned RELEVANT COPIES that MAY be provided whereas the request only for payment link for copies that the former CPIO had agreed to provide (and therefore I did not file appeals in related matters) is not quite open to fresh decision by the present CPIO. C. CPIO has wrongly used RTI Online DISPOSED OF option to decide a request for RTI Online payment link. I will have to make a fresh request for the payment link. Appeals Nos. CICOM/A/E/24/00225 & 00226 on this ground are already pending. REQUEST: Please direct CPIO to (i) compute the charge for copies of ALL the pages listed with my request dt. 15.06.24, (ii) promptly provide RTI Online payment link when I make fresh request for the same again, and (iii) expeditiously provide, after I have made payment, copies in the form in which requested - i.e., in the form of scanned copies by email instead of photocopies by post for avoiding avoidable wastage of resources. "
DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY:
The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused.
In the instant case, CPIO (Admin Section) is directed to provide information as sought by the appellant as per available records, as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 06.09.2024.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly. |
NA |