Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

D Dhananjaya vs Archaeological Survey Of India on 6 December, 2022

Author: Uday Mahurkar

Bench: Uday Mahurkar

                                      के न्द्रीयसच
                                                 ू नाआयोग
                          Central Information Commission
                                    बाबागगं नाथमागग,मुननरका
                           Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                            नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

द्वितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/ALSOI/A/2022/121573 -UM

Mr. D Dhananjaya
                                                                      ....अपीलकताा/Appellant
                                         VERSUS
                                           बनाम
CPIO
Archaeological Survey Of India,
 O/o The Superintending Archaeologist,
Hampi Circle, Kamalapur- 505102
                                                                  ....प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing     :             05.12.2022
Date of Decision    :             06.12.2022

Date of RTI application                                               11.01.2022
CPIO's response                                                       24.03.2022
Date of the First Appeal                                              01.03.2022
First Appellate Authority's response                                  Not on record
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission                  06.05.2022

                                        ORDER

FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information, as under:-

The CPIO vide letter dated 24.03.2022, furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal. The order of the FAA, if any, is not on the record of the Commission. Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.
Page 1 of 2
HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: The appellant attended the hearing through AC. Respondent: The respondent was not present despite notice.
The respondent remained absent during the hearing despite notice. The Appellant reiterated the contents of the RTI application and submitted that partial, false, and misleading information was provided by the CPIO.
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the appellant and after perusal of the documents available on record, the Commission directs the Respondent to furnish correct and complete information to the Appellant, free of cost, in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 21 days from the date of receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.
Moreover, the Commission takes a serious view of the absence of the CPIO, ASI, Hampi Circle, Kamalapur, despite notice and directs him to submit a written statement before the Commission, explaining his absence, along with the comments of the First Appellate Authority, before 30.12.2022, both by post and by uploading on http://dsscic.nic.in/online-link-paper-compliance/add.
The Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर) ू ना आयुक्त) (Information Commissioner) (सच Authenticated true copy (अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पजं ीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 06.12.2022 Page 2 of 2