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
891 CICOM/A/E/23/00389 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 02-11-2023 Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/23/00779 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "Wrongly denied Kindly provide complete and correct information." DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. As per Section 8(1)(j) information which relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual may be exempted from disclosure unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information. 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
892 CICOM/A/E/23/00391 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 02-11-2023 Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/23/00781 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "Provided incomplete, Misleading of False information. Kindly provide complete and correct 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
893 CICOM/A/P/23/00164 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 01-11-2023 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/P/23/00545 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal being unsatisfied with the reply of CPIO and also asked for opportunity of hearing. DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. The opportunity of written submission, for the first appeal, provided to the appellant is found to be reasonable opportunity of hearing. The written submissions made by the appellant in his first appeal application are found to be sufficient for consideration by the FAA to arrive at a decision under the RTI Act, 2005. Accordingly, it was felt that the personal hearing as requested by appellant was not necessary. 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. There is no provision for review of the first appeal under the RTI Act, 2005. 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
894 CICOM/A/P/23/00165 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 01-11-2023 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/P/23/00546 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal being unsatisfied with the reply of CPIO and also asked for opportunity of hearing. DECISION OF FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY: The First Appeal, RTI application and reply given by CPIO of CIC have been perused. The opportunity of written submission, for the first appeal, provided to the appellant is found to be reasonable opportunity of hearing. The written submissions made by the appellant in his first appeal application are found to be sufficient for consideration by the FAA to arrive at a decision under the RTI Act, 2005. Accordingly, it was felt that the personal hearing as requested by appellant was not necessary. 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. There is no provision for review of the first appeal under the RTI Act, 2005. 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
895 CICOM/A/P/23/00162 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 30-10-2023 Ref RTI No.- CICOM/R/P/23/00527 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that “I am to invite your kind attention towards the File No. CICOM/R/P/23/00527 my RTI application dated submitted to PIO CIC New Delhi has not mentioned, and to say that the requisite information provided by the PIO is misleading. 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. 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
896 CICOM/A/P/23/00163 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 30-10-2023 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/P/23/00422 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
897 CICOM/A/E/23/00383 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 30-10-2023 Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/23/01122 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "Sir I am submitting ban appeal under section 19 1 of RTI act 2005 for ATR on written prayer for early schedule hearing and compliance all second Appeal 45 days for disposal within stipulated period since registration at CIC New Delhi ( copy attached herewith). Hence sir please admit this appeal and would be a passed approximate order in accordance to law and RTI rules 41(b)" 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
898 CICOM/A/E/23/00384 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 30-10-2023 Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/23/01122 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "Sir I am submitting ban appeal under section 19 1 of RTI act 2005 for ATR on written prayer for early schedule hearing and compliance all second Appeal 45 days for disposal within stipulated period since registration at CIC New Delhi ( copy attached herewith). Hence sir please admit this appeal and would be a passed approximate order in accordance to law and RTI rules 41(b)" 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
899 CICOM/A/E/23/00382 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 27-10-2023 Ref RTI No. - CICOM/R/E/23/01121 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that "Sir .kindly provide a copy of action taken report ( ATR) by registry DR to IC on submission request for early hearing through online CIc portal vide diary within stipulated period with 45 days in disposal procedure under 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
900 CICOM/A/E/23/00381 Ms. ROOP AVTAR KAUR 27-10-2023 Ref RTI No. -CICOM/R/E/23/01123 GROUNDS FOR FIRST APPEAL: The Appellant submitted first appeal stating that " It is humbly submitted to you that P.I.O. concerned has provided incorrect, misleading and false reply against requisite information. He has denied to provide certified copy of second appeal application along with its attachments / enclosures registered vide no. CIC/REVDP/A/2023/619715 by saying that as per rule, copy of documents / requisite information cannot be provided under the provisions of RTI Act, 2005 while he did not provide copy of rule that supports his reply or denies to provide requisite information. He provided incorrect, misleading and false reply intentionally to avoid supply of requisite information. It is requested to you kindly direct P.I.O. concerned to provide requisite information within 15 days or as earlier as possible. Thanks for your consideration and understanding." 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