There are serious errors in your form submission, please see below for details.

Search RTI Appeal

List of RTI Appeal

SNo. Registration No Appellate Authority Name Received date Reply Appeal Reply Doc
711 CICOM/A/E/24/00064 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 28-02-2024 Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/24/00249 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "Sir, The RTI application CICOM/R/E/24/00249 has been closed with the response as QUOTE Point no. 1 & 2 pertains to MR Section, Point no. 3 pertains to Dak Section UNQUOTE Is this how, the RTI request is disposed by the ultimate authority who is supposed to implement RTI Act, effectively? If not, I request you to instruct the concerned CPIO to provide the response for each question explicitly." DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. CPIO (M&R Section) is directed to reply to the RTI application and provide information as per available records, as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
712 CICOM/A/E/24/00063 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 28-02-2024 Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/24/00118 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "CPIO provided incomplete Misleading or False information Qns. 1 to 5 : List not provided, Kindly provide complete list of employees with designation. Qns. 6 : Details not provided , where are their postings kindly provide details. Qns. 7 & 9: Information not provided Qns. 8: Posting details not provided, where are their postings kindly provide details. Description of Information Sought Qns. 1 : How many employees have been deployed by the administration in the registry of Shri Hiralal Samaria, Chief Information Commissioner? Please provide complete list of employees with designation. Qns. 2 : How many employees have been deployed by the administration in the registry of Shri Vinod Kumar Tiwari, Information Commissioner? Please provide complete list of employees with designation. Qns. 3 : How many employees have been deployed by the administration in the registry of Mrs. Anandi Ramalingam, Information Commissioner? Please provide complete list of employees with designation. Qns. 4 : How many employees have been deployed by the administration in the Central Registry? Please provide complete list of employees with designation. Qns. 5 : How many employees are posted in the administration & Legal Cell. Please provide complete list of employees with designation. Qns. 6 : How many outsourced drivers are there in the commission and where are their postings kindly provide details. Qns. 7: How many outsourced drivers are in surplus. Kindly provide list of surplus Drivers and what action taken on surplus outsourced drivers. Qns. 8 : How many outsourced MTS are there in the commission and where are their postings kindly provide details. Qns. 9: How many outsourced MTS are in surplus. Kindly provide list of surplus MTS and what action taken on surplus outsourced MTS." DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. 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
713 CICOM/A/E/24/00062 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 27-02-2024 Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/23/01421 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "NB: This First Appeal is filed late by about 4 days due to technical reasons linked to RTI-Online portal non-functioning / non-accessibility for non-Indian IP addresses. Error message - you dont have permission to access this resource. Whereas we well appreciate the cyber security needs of the Government of India, it should not be at cost of fundamental right of Indian citizens to democratically communicate through digital means with their government over internet as per UN treaty obligations. This appellant has also formally complained about RTI Online portal defects to DoPT over CPGRAMS. Hence this appeal may kindly be processed. This appeal is filed on following distinct and separate grounds 1. Because each and every item of information requested at points 1 thtough 9 of my request not only exists in CIC but is required in law to be maintained by CIC. 2. Because my RTI request was filed to CIC as a public authority and not to any specific CPIO such as Mr. Hariharan. 3. Because the dealing CPIO, who is a contractual employee, has curiously failed to seek assistance u/s 5(4)of the Act of Central Govt deputed officers in CIC actually holding or having access rights to the said requested information, such as JS(PB) and JS(Admin) etc. 4. Because the HoD of CIC has curiously failed to publish the requested information suo-moto. 5. Because there are only 2 sanctioned posts for Legal Advisors in CIC however, strangely there are about 16 to 18 such advcates secretly and privately employed as Legal Retainers to the Information Commissioners mostly at highly excessive salaries or fees, apparently without any budgetary sanction and in complete contravention of GFR-2017 norms. 6. Because it is very curious that the HoDs of CIC, who are all All India Service officers and ACC appointees, have never bothered to inquire into or crack down these financial anomalies and gross disregard for GFR regulations. Especially considering that these are regularly minuted by the CIC such as 08.02.2016, 10.10.2017, 4.12.2020 etc. 7. Because the fees for outsourcing legal work to advocates had been decided by the Commission as far back as its office order dated 28.12.2015 accessible at URL https://cic.gov.in/index.php/sites/default/files/Circulars%20%26Noification/Office%20Order%2028-12-2015.pdf but would have been updated as per the above referred MoMs etc. 8. Because claim of non maintenance of information is blatant insult to Parliament, citizens and democracy. 9. Because for point 10 the reply of CPIO is non-specific and not as per books of accounts or section 4 disclosure norms. 10. Because non-provision of the requested information gives cause for vigilance angle against all Central Govt officers employed in the Commission for malfeasance. PRAYERS 1. Kindly give me personal hearing 2. Kindly admit / allow the appeal for reason/s stated above 3. Kindly provide me all the information requested." DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. In the instant appeal, the appellant had requested for personal hearing of the first appeal to which a hearing was conducted on 05.04.2024 at 12:00 noon. Both the appellant and the CPIO were present in the hearing. All the submissions made by the appellant were considered during the decision on the first appeal. It was informed to the appellant that the legal consultants are contractually engaged for the assistance of the Information Commissioners and are not working as advocates of the Central Information Commission to contest any court cases. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. NA
714 CICOM/A/E/24/00058 Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI 26-02-2024 On perusal of the 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
715 CICOM/A/E/24/00055 Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI 22-02-2024 On perusal of the RTI application and reply given by 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. However, to assist the Appellant, it is stated that RTI Act, 2005 and RTI Rules, 2012 are available on CIC’s websites link https://cic.gov.in/sites/default/files/2012/RTI-Compendium.pdf respectively. NA
716 CICOM/A/E/24/00054 Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI 22-02-2024 ऑनलाइन आर. टी. आई. आवेदन, प्रदान की गई सूचना एवं प्रथम अपील का अवलोकन करने पर पाया गया कि अपीलकर्ता के आर.टी.आई. आवेदन सं. CICOM/R/E/24/00023 में सूचना मांगी थी जिसके प्रतिउत्तर में केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा प्रेषित की गई सूचना, सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम के प्रावधानों एवं मांगी गई सूचना के अनुसार ही है। अतः केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी द्वारा प्रदान की गई सूचना तथ्यात्मक है और इसमें प्रथम अपीलीय अधिकारी के हस्तक्षेप की कोई आवश्यकता नहीं है। NA
717 CICOM/A/E/24/00052 Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI 21-02-2024 On perusal of the 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
718 CICOM/A/E/24/00053 Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI 21-02-2024 The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. In the instant case, CPIO (DR to CIC – HS) is directed to revisit the RTI application and provide information as available on record as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 01.04.2024. NA
719 CICOM/A/E/24/00051 Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI 20-02-2024 On perusal of the 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
720 CICOM/A/E/24/00050 Brig. VIPIN CHAKRAWARTI 18-02-2024 On perusal of the Appeal, RTI application and reply of the CPIO, it is observed that the information given by the CPIO is as per provision of the RTI Act, 2005. Therefore, no further intervention is required on the part of FAA in the matter. NA