Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Chindam Damodar vs Department Of Posts on 28 July, 2021

Author: Uday Mahurkar

Bench: Uday Mahurkar

                                      के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
                              Central Information Commission
                                  बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
                               Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                               नईदिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

नितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/POSTS/A/2019/143910-UM

Mr Chindam Damodar



                                                                             ....अपीलकर्ता/Appellant
                                            VERSUS
                                              बनतम

CPIO,
Department Of Post
O/O SupdtOf Post Offices
Hanamkonda Division Hanamkonda 506001,
Warangal, Telangana



                                                                             प्रतर्वतदीगण /Respondent



Date of Hearing       :             20.07.2021
Date of Decision      :             28.07.2021

Date of RTI application                                                    14-05-2019
CPIO's response                                                            13-06-2019
Date of the First Appeal                                                   22-07-2019
First Appellate Authority's response                                       31-07-2019
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission                       11-09-2019

                                           ORDER

FACTS The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 03 points, as under:-

The CPIO vide letter dated 13.06.2019, furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal.The FAA vide order dated 31.07.2019,directed the CPIO & SPOs Hanamkonda Division to supply the requested information to the Appellant, after seeking the consent from the nominee of the said SB account number.

Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission with a request to provide the complete information, free of cost.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: Mr. Chindam Damodar, Adv, through VC; Respondent: Mr. Wara Prasad, ASPO/ CPIO, through VC.

The Appellant while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application submitted that the son of the deceased person is his client and therefore he is seeking the said information. The Respondent present during the hearing submitted that the Appellant is in no way connected with the Third party. However as per the direction of the First Appellate Authority, the consent of the nominee had been sought under Sec. 11. The nominee denied furnishing the said information and accordingly a reply was furnished to the Appellant.

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties and also after perusing the documents available on record the Commission finds that an appropriate reply as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 had already been furnished by the Respondent and hence no further intervention by the Commission is required in the matter.

The Appeal stands disposed accordingly.

(Uday Mahurkar) (उिय माहूरकर) (Information Commissioner) (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानित एवं सत्यानपत प्रनत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 दिनांक / Date: 28.07.2021 Page 3 of 3