Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Naresh Kadyan vs Department Of Revenue on 11 February, 2026

                                के ीय सूचना आयोग
                          Central Information Commission
                             बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
                           Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                           नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067


File No: CIC/DOREV/C/2024/616141

Naresh Kadyan                                    ....िशकायतकता /Complainant

                                        VERSUS
                                         बनाम

CPIO,
Office of the Chief
Commissioner, Central GST and
Central Excise, Panchkula
Zone, 407, S.C.O, 408, Sector
8, Panchkula, Haryana - 134109                        .... ितवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing                     :    02.02.2026
Date of Decision                    :    11.02.2026

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER :               Vinod Kumar Tiwari

Relevant facts emerging from complaint:

RTI application filed on            :    27.02.2024
CPIO replied on                     :    29.02.2024
First appeal filed on               :    02.03.2024
First Appellate Authority's order   :    04.03.2024
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated          :    18.04.2024

Information sought

:

1. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 27.02.2024 (online) seeking the following information:

"Community Policing as scouting for Biodiversity, in the presence of Brand Ambassador Viyana Berwal:

Supply action taken report, all communications made by Haryana Excise Department, related to GST Slab on wildlife trophies.

Supply complete details, head month wise, revenue collection by Haryana, since 2017-18 up to 2024-25, related to, Guidelines on Access to Biological Resources and Associated Knowledge and Benefits Sharing Regulations, 2014 are also violated for profit, and GST collection, keeping in view:

1. Annual Financial Statement & Explanatory Memorandum 2024-25.

2. Annual Financial Statement & Explanatory Memorandum 2023-24.

3. Annual Financial Statement & Explanatory Memorandum 2022-23.

4. Annual Financial Statement & Explanatory Memorandum 2021-22.

5. Annual Financial Statement & Explanatory Memorandum 2020-21.

6. Annual Financial Statement & Explanatory Memorandum 2019-20.

7. Annual Financial Statement & Explanatory Memorandum 2018-19.

As per the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972: Section 49B: Prohibition of dealings in trophies, animal articles, etc., derived from scheduled animals. But Biological resources are openly traded, breaching public trust, even Haryana Assembly approved documentation, besides violations of IPC, keeping in view CrPC and others laws of land, including Guidelines on Access to Biological Resources and Associated Knowledge and Benefits Sharing Regulations, 2014.

@2.5% taxable:

1. Ivory, tortoise-shell, whalebone and whalebone hair, horns, unworked or simply prepared but not cut to shape, powder and waste of these products.

2. Coral and similar materials, unworked or simply prepared but not otherwise worked, shells of molluscs, crustaceans or echinoderms and cuttle-bone, unworked or simply prepared but not cut to shape, powder and waste thereof.

3. Ambergris, castoreum, civet and musk, cantharides, bile, whether or not dried, glands and other animal products used in the preparation of pharmaceutical products, fresh, chilled, frozen or otherwise provisionally preserved.

4. Skins and other parts of birds, with their feathers or down, feathers and parts of feathers (whether or not with trimmed edges) and down, not further worked than cleaned, disinfected or treated for preservation, powder and waste of feathers or parts of feathers. @6% taxable:

Worked ivory, bone, tortoise shell, horn, antlers, mother of pearl, and other animal carving material and articles of these materials, articles of coral (including articles obtained by moulding).

Distribution:

1. Leader of opposition, Haryana

2. Speaker, Haryana."

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Complainant on 29.02.2024 stating as under:

"This is to inform that the facility of online transfer of RTI application to State Government Public Information Authority is not available. Accordingly, the subject RTI has been transferred offline to SPIO, The Excise & Taxation Officer, Excise & Taxation Department, Haryana in accordance with the provision of Section of 6(3) of RTI Act, 2005. The online RTI application filed with this office is dispose off accordingly vide this office letter 29.02.2024. Further, it is also requested to make further correspondence with the SPIO to whom the application is being transferred. Copy of the letter attached."

3. Being dissatisfied, the Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 02.03.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 04.03.2024, held as under:

"1. In this regard the subject RTI application dated 27.02.2024 of Sh. Naresh Kadyan was transferred by the CPIO(CCO) CGST & CE Zone, Panchkula to the SPIO, The Excise and Taxation Department, Vanijya Bhawan, Sector 5 Panchkula vide letter dated 29.02.2024 as the information sought by you pertained to the said Office. The said letter was also endorsed to you for making further correspondence with the concerned SPIO.

Thus, as the original RTI application has already been transferred to the concerned SPIO, the instant RTI First Appeal Application dated CIC/DOREV/C/2024/616141 Page 3 of 6 02.03.2024 does not lie with this office. It is therefore requested to approach the appropriate authority.

2. Further, please refer to DOPT OМ no. 10/2/2008-IR dated 12/06/2008, wherein it has been clarified that if a person makes an application to a public authority for some information which is the concern of a public authority under any State Government or the UT, the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the public authority receiving the application should inform the applicant that the information may be had from the concerned State Government. Moreover, the instructions on the home page of the portal clearly indicate viz. Please do not file RTI applications through this portal for the public authorities under the State Governments, including Government of NCT Delhi.

Accordingly, the instant RTI First Appeal Application dated 02.03.2024 does not lie with this office. It is therefore requested to approach the appropriate authority."

4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Complainant: Absent Respondent: Shri Sunil Ganjoo, CPIO/Assistants Commissioner, appeared through video conference.

5. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal/Complaint on Respondent while filing the same in CIC on 18.04.2024 is not available on record. The Respondent confirmed non-service. Thus, Regulation No. 10 of the Central Information Commission Management Regulations 2007 has not been complied with by the Appellant.

6. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the RTI application was not maintainable before the Central Government authority as the information sought exclusively pertained to the Excise & Taxation Department of the Government of Haryana. It was further submitted that the RTI application was duly transferred under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act to the CIC/DOREV/C/2024/616141 Page 4 of 6 concerned State Authorities and that no information was withheld or denied by the Respondent. The Respondent also pointed out that the online RTI portal does not permit electronic transfer to State Public Authorities, necessitating offline transfer.

Decision

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the Respondent and perusal of the records, noted that the present Complaint has been filed by the Complainant under Section 18 of the RTI Act alleging non-furnishing of information in response to his RTI application. The Commission observes that the Respondent Authority does not hold or control the information sought by the Complainant. The RTI Act obliges a Public Authority to provide only such information as is available and held by it. In the present case, the Respondent has transferred the RTI application to the appropriate State Public Information Officer under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act and duly informed the Complainant.

8. In view of the above, the Central Information Commission does not have jurisdiction on a matter pertaining squarely to the State Authorities of Haryana; however, Commission finds it appropriate to record its observations as under.

9. The Commission further observes that issues raised by the Complainant fall outside the scope of the Commission's jurisdiction under the RTI Act as these pertained to alleged statutory violations, policy matters, and public trust concerns. The RTI mechanism cannot be used for adjudication of allegations, interpretation of laws, or redressal of grievances. In view of the foregoing, the Commission finds no lapse or mala fide on the part of the Respondent in handling the RTI application. Hence, intervention of the Commission is not warranted in the matter.

The Complaint is dismissed accordingly.

Sd/-

Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) Sd/-

(S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date CIC/DOREV/C/2024/616141 Page 5 of 6 Copy To:

The FAA, Office of the Chief Commissioner, Central GST and Central Excise, Panchkula Zone, 407, S.C.O, 408, Sector 8, Panchkula, Haryana - 134109 CIC/DOREV/C/2024/616141 Page 6 of 6 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)