Central Information Commission
Nutan Thakur vs Ministry Of Defence on 24 March, 2021
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क य सुचना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मुिनरका, नई द ली - 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
File no.: - CIC/DODEF/A/2019/117538
In the matter of:
Nutan Thakur
... Appellant
VS
CPIO / Dy. Secretary (Air Acquisition),
Air Acquisition (Capital) Wing,
Ministry of Defence, D (Air - I),
Room No. 301, Vayu Bhawan,
New Delhi - 110001
...Respondent
RTI application filed on : 27/11/2018 CPIO replied on : 12/12/2018 First appeal filed on : 08/01/2019 First Appellate Authority order : 26/02/2019 Second Appeal Filed on : 12/04/2019 Date of Hearing : 23/03/2021 Date of Decision : 23/03/2021 The following were present: Appellant: Present over VC
Respondent: Shri Harish Kumar, Director & CPIO, Air Acquisition and Shri AN Sinha, Director & DPIO and Shri S S Chauhan, Section Officer(Air-I), all present over intra VC Information Sought:
The appellant has sought the details of the various complaints received in the MOD about the Rafale deal controversy, related to the purchase of 36 multirole fighter aircraft for an estimated price of Rs.58,000 crore (equal to 7.8 billion euros) by the Defence Ministry from Dassault Aviation, France.1
Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information quoting Sec.8(1)(a) of the RTI Act.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant submitted that till date no information has been provided to her.
The CPIO reiterated the contents of his written submissions dated 15.03.2021.
Observations:
From a perusal of the relevant case records and the written submissions of the CPIO dated 15.03.2021, it is noted that in compliance with the order of the FAA, a detailed reply was given by the CPIO on 15.02.2019 wherein it was informed that no action was taken on the 20 complaints received as the issues were settled through the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is further noted that the CPIO in his written submissions had answered every issue raised by the appellant in her second appeal.The Commission is unable to find any flaw in the reply so given. However, the CPIO is directed to resend a copy of the submissions dated 15.03.2021 to the appellant on her email id [email protected].
Decision:
In view of the above, the CPIO is directed to resend a copy of the submissions dated 15.03.2021 to the appellant on the above mentioned email id within 01 day from today.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मा णत स या पत ित) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011- 26182594 / दनांक / Date 2