Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Surendra Bahadur Yadav vs Department Of Posts on 28 April, 2025

                                      के ीय सूचना आयोग
                              Central Information Commission
                                   बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
                               Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                                 नई िद    ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं        ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/POSTS/A/2024/107019

Surendra Bahadur Yadav                                            ... अपीलकता/Appellant

                                         VERSUS
                                          बनाम
CPIO: Department of Post,
Balia, UP                                                     ... ितवादीगण/Respondents

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 08.11.2023                FA       : 26.12.2023             SA     : 27.02.2024

CPIO : 12.12.2023               FAO : 24.01.2024                  Hearing : 21.04.2025


Date of Decision: 25.04.2025
                                         CORAM:
                                   Hon'ble Commissioner
                                 _ANANDI RAMALINGAM
                                        ORDER

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 08.11.2023 seeking information on the following points:

 Please arrange to supply certified copy of below mentioned documents of file no.

RPV/Plg/M-6/FO/Pariwad/2017 related to Baila Franchisee outlet no 2770010110 under RTI act 2005.

1. Notesheets w.e.f. 01.04.2017 to 07.11.2023

2. Correspondences 01.04.2017 to 07.11.2023

3. Plaints:- Arbitration, civil court Ballia, High Court Allahabad

4. Counter Affidavits: Arbitrations, civil court Ballia, High Court Allahabad

5. Decisions: Arbitrator, civil court Ballia. High Court Allahabad Page 1 of 4

6. Proceeding sheets: Arbitrations, civil court Ballia, High Court Allahabad

7. Fees Paid: Arbitrator. Advocate Sh. Kanhaiya Krishna, Adv. Sh. Sachindra Nath Dubey, Adv. Sh. Ajay Singh.

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 12.12.2023 and the same is reproduced as under :-

          "िब दु सं   ा 3-वां िछत सूचना        नहीं है।

          िब दु सं    ा 4-माननीय उ         ायालय म िवचाराधीन है अतः दे य नहीं है ।

          िब दु सं    ा 5-संल है।

          िब दु सं    ा 6-सूचना उपल       नहीं है।

          िब दु सं    ा 7-सूचना 8 (1) (जे) के अंतगत कटन से छूट ा         है ।"

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.12.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 24.01.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 27.02.2024.

5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan, Postmaster, attended the hearing through video conference.

6. The appellant inter alia submitted that the reply furnished by the CPIO was not in accordance with the information sought in the RTI application. He further submitted that the RTI application was filed to CPIO Varanasi office then why the reply had been provided by the CPIO, Ballia office. He requested the Commission to direct the respondent to furnish the information as sought.

7. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that a point-wise suitable reply on point nos. 3 to 7 of the RTI application has been furnished to the appellant vide letter dated 12.12.2023 as the information pertains to Ballia office. On being quired, he stated that point nos. 1 and 2 of the RTI application were responded by the CPIO, Varanasi office but copy of the same has not been produced for the Commission's perusal.

8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that CPIO, Ballia, has provided appropriate reply on point no. 3 to 7 of the RTI application. The respondent during the hearing submitted that point nos. 1 and 2 were responded by the CPIO, Varanasi but copy of the same has not been uploaded on Commission's portal. Therefore, the Commission directs Mr. Abdul Kalam Khan to furnish a copy of the reply of the CPIO's Varanasi, to the appellant within 10 days from the date of the receipt of this order, under intimation to the Commission. With this observation and direction, the appeal is disposed of.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 25.04.2025 Authenticated true copy Sharad Kumar (शरद कुमार) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:

1. The CPIO Office of the Superintendent of Post Offices, Department of Posts, Balia Division, Balia, Uttar Pradesh - 277001 Page 3 of 4

2. Surendra Bahadur Yadav Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)