Central Information Commission
Msp Aishwarya vs Ministry Of Home Affairs on 23 February, 2016
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi110067
Decision No. CIC/VS/A/2014/001027/SB
Dated 23.02.2016
Appellant : Ms. P. Aishwarya,
H.No.2318/10 (Mega No.222)
Tulasi Nagar Colony,
Near Golnaka Cross Roads,
Hyderabad500 013.
Respondent : Central Public Information Officer
Ministry of Home Affairs,
F.F. Division/
Hyderabad Cell (Court),
NDCCII Bhawan, Jai Singh Road
New Delhi110 001.
Date of Hearing : 23.02.2016
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI application filed on : 02.12.2013
CPIO's reply : 31.12.2013
First appeal filed on : 16.01.2014
FAA's order : 31.01.2014
Second Appeal dated : 25.02.2014
ORDER
1. Ms.P.Aishwarya filed an application dated 02.12.2013 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO),Freedom Fighters Division, Ministry of Home Affairs (M.H.A.) seeking information on sixteen points pertaining to the case of Smt. P. Lakshmamma, Freedom Fighter including (i) provide daily progress report of Shri S. Jaipal Reddy ji, Hon'ble Union Cabinet Minister's letter dated 05.11.2013 addressed to Joint Secretary to Govt. of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, (ii) give names, designations, addresses and telephone numbers of the officials with whom the said letter dated 05.11.2013 was lying during this period, (iii) intimate date wise periods when it was lying with which officer and what was the action taken by that official during that period on what dates and (iv) give copies of Receipt and Dispatch Registers which record the movements of said letter in the offices of each of these officials.
2. The appellant filed second appeal dated 25.02.2014 before the Commission on the ground that the information provided by the CPIO contains entirely unnecessary, inaccurate, unsatisfactory, irrelevant and misleading particulars and not the information required by her. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide correct, clear and full information duly authenticated and attested and also give her an opportunity of being heard in person and/or by her authorized representative before any decision is taken in the matter. Hearing:
3. The appellant Smt. P. Aishwarya and the respondent were not present despite notice. Decision:
4. The Commission upon perusal of records observes that the information as available has been provided by the respondent vide letter dated 31.12.2013 and hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.
5. With the above observation, the appeal is disposed of.
6. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Sudhir Bhargava) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (V.K. Sharma) Designated Officer