| SNo. | Registration No | Appellate Authority Name | Received date | Reply Appeal | Reply Doc |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 741 | CICOM/A/P/24/00016 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 31-01-2024 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/P/23/00684 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that no reply is received by the CPIO. 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. In the instant case, the CPIO(Dak Section) has already replied to the RTI application on 24.01.2024,i.e. within the stipulated time limit as per the provisions of RTI Act, 2005 but as mentioned by the appellant in the first appeal of non-receipt of the reply, a copy of the RTI reply is being attached with this order. 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 |
| 742 | CICOM/A/E/24/00033 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 31-01-2024 | Ref RTI No. -CICOM/R/E/23/01344 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that " 1. That certified copies were demanded in point no.1 of this RTI application. 2. That as per sub-section (9) of section 7 of RTI Act 2005 (copy enclosed), An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionally divert the resources of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question. 3. That concerned PIO did not provide certified copies regarding the information sought in point no.1 of this RTI application. 4. That concerned PIO did not give any reason mentioned in sub-section (9) of section 7 of RTI Act 2005." 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 |
| 743 | CICOM/A/E/24/00032 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 29-01-2024 | Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/24/00088 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "The information furnished against the RTI Application No. CICOM/R/E/24/00088 dated 25-01-2024 is incomplete. Request to please provide the below sought information in defined timeline : 1. Please provide the Hearing date of Second Appeal No. CIC/DEPOL/A/2023/653398 dated 05-12-2023. 2. Please share the General timeframe within which Hearing is scheduled once Second Appeal is registered with CIC." 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 |
| 744 | CICOM/A/P/24/00014 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 25-01-2024 | Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/P/23/00642 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that “I am to invite your kind attention towards my RTI application dated 13.11.2023 submitted to PIO CIC New Delhi and to say that the requisite information has not been provided by the PIO. Hence it is deemed refused. You are requested to take action under RTI Act and provide the information please." 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. In the instant case, the CPIO(DR to IC-VT) has already replied to the RTI application on 03.01.2024 but as mentioned by the appellant in the first appeal of non-receipt of the reply, a copy of the RTI reply is being attached with this order. 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 |
| 745 | CICOM/A/E/24/00031 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 25-01-2024 | Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/23/01399 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "Respected Madam, As the computer systems used by CIC will be of latest generation technology and software’s which are up to date it is quite unreasonable to say that computer system does not retain the emails and SMSs sent. Any layman even using smart phone today is aware of the memory capacity available in market today. So Kindly requested information as per my RTI application be provided to me" 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 |
| 746 | CICOM/A/E/24/00030 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 24-01-2024 | Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/23/01438 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "THE APPLICANT HAD LODGED A COMPLAINT IN CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION DATED 28/11/2023 WHOSE DIARY NUMBER IS 652798 WHICH COMES UNDER YOUR OFFICE. PLEASE PROVIDE ME THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT 2005 :- 1 PROVIDE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT MADE BY THE APPLICANT TILL WHERE THE INVESTIGATION WAS DONE. 2 PROVIDE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE REPORT OR FINAL INVESTIGATION REPORT MEAD BY THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER OR THE OFFICER CONCERNED." 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 (DR to IC-VT) is directed to revisit the RTI application and provide information as per available records, as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 29.02.2024. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |
| 747 | CICOM/A/E/24/00029 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 23-01-2024 | Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/24/00001 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "(Appeal against supply of incorrect copies) CONTEXT: My COMPLAINT No. CIC/CICOM/C/2022/641829 concerning CIC was taken up on 19/12/23. Observations of the bench at hearing conveyed that my question for inquiry was valid. By Order dated 22/12/23 however my Complaint was dismissed (not disposed of u/s 18(2)) - w.r.t to some letter dated 23/05/22 of the respondent and old Order dated 16/12/22 on APPEALS dated 08/03/22 concerning DOPT (Nos. CIC/DOP&T/A/2022/614175, 78 & 79). I had received no letter dated 23/05/22 or copy of any written submission an no oral arguments against my Complaint were raised by CPIOs present at the hearing. FACTS: I made request dated 02/01/24 No. CICOM/R/E/24/00001 for (1) COPY of the letter dated 23/05/22 and (2) COPY of written submission / letter by which it was placed on record in F. No. CIC/CICOM/C/2022/641829. By letter dated 17/01/24 (on subject Providing information under RTI Act, 2005 and saying: 1 &2 A copy of the letter dated 23.05.2022 is attached herewith) CPIO provided copies of (i) Notification dated 11/10/2005 of constitution of CIC and (ii) Action History of RTI Request No. DOP&T/R/T/22/01621. GROUNDS: The copies provided are NOT the copies requested and it is not clear how or why they came to be part of F. No. CIC/CICOM/C/2022/641829. (i) Notification dated 11/10/2005 is available on CIC website. A copy was also provided by the then DOPT IR-I Section CPIO on transfer No. DOP&T/R/T/22/01703 dated 13/05/22 that was subject of 2nd Appeal No. CIC/DOP&T/A/2022/641831 dated 31/07/22 against partial disposal. (ii) No. DOP&T/R/T/22/01621 dated 09/05/22 was disposed of by DOPT IR-II Section CPIO with online Reply and was subject of Complaint No. CIC/CICOM/C/2022/641829 dated 31/07/22 against false and misleading information. (Both cases dated 31/07/22 were dismissed by error-filled combined Order dated 26/06/23 two months after hearings and my request to CIC Registrar for corrected separate orders on Complaint and Appeal in view of the Manipur Judgement of the Supreme Court is pending.) REQUEST: Please have the requested copies provided or, if no letter dated 23/05/22 (point-1) was duly submitted by respondent written submission (point-2) in F. No. CIC/CICOM/C/2022/641829, please inform who placed in it the copies that CPIO has provided." 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 (DR to IC-AR) is directed to revisit the RTI application and provide information as per available records, as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 29.02.2024. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |
| 748 | CICOM/A/E/24/00028 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 22-01-2024 | Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/T/23/00106 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "To flout the RTIA the CPIO did not transfer the application . CIC itself flouts orders . The information sought is on ATR by NALSA under Art 51A and NALSA has marked the same to CIC . The unlawful acts at CIC departing from Art 51A include such habitual acts of CPIOs and others at CIC , aiding respondent public authorities flout law for 5 years and not taking action against them and not reporting the same in CICs annual reports making those reports misleading , deceitful and fraudulent and not maintaining records and not digitalizing and not cataloging them as mandated by Sec 4 RTIA and refusing to even order the same in second appeals against CIC thereby encouraging public servants to continue with their unlawful acts which accord undue advantages to fraudsters . Further an anti corruption body and its servants engaged in unlawful acts and placing such annual reports" DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. CPIO (DR to CIC) is directed to reply to the RTI application and provide information as per available records, as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 by 29.02.2024. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. | NA |
| 749 | CICOM/A/E/24/00027 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 20-01-2024 | Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/23/01375 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "The information sought by the applicant in point 1 of the original application has not been resolved in the true sense. Rather, information has been given which was not required in the application. The applicant had sought information that due to non-compliance by the CPIO, the applicant had filed a complaint dated-25.09.2022. A copy of the notesheet and other documents of the action taken on this complaint was sought. But the affidavit dated-25.08.2022 given by the CPIO has been given to the applicant. Due to which the applicant has not received the desired information. A copy of the complaint made by the applicant on date-25.09.2022 is attached with this first appeal. Please pass appropriate order and provide information." 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 |
| 750 | CICOM/A/E/24/00024 | Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR | 19-01-2024 | Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/23/01403/2 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that CPIO refused access to information requested. 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 |