Central Information Commission
Kondamuri Kusuma Nagendra Prasad vs National Highways Authority Of India ... on 13 May, 2025
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/NHAIN/A/2024/122527
Shri Kondamuri Kusuma Nagendra Prasad ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, National Highways Authority of India ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 08.05.2025
Date of Decision : 08.05.2025
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 22.02.2024
PIO replied on : NA
First Appeal filed on : 12.04.2024
First Appellate Order on : NA
2 Appeal/complaint received on
nd : 18.07.2024
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 22.02.2024 seeking information on the following points:-
"1. Pertaining to passage of NH-216 in Yanam region, please furnish copies of entire correspondence held between your department with the departments of Govt. of Puducherry such as: 1) Public Works Department, Yanam, 2) the Revenue Department and 3) the Yanam Municipality including vice versa.
2. Pertaining to various encroachments of your lands, along the NH-216 in Yanam region, by the adjacent land owners, please furnish copies of all notices those have been issued to said encroachers."
The CPIO, DGM(T), Vijayawada vide letter dated 18.04.2024 transferred the RTI Application to concerned CPIO.
Meanwhile on not receiving any reply from the CPIO within time limit, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 12.04.2024 which was not adjudicated by the FAA.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
A written submission dated 03.05.2025 bearing has been received from the CPIO, Page 1 of 3 Project Director, Project Implementation Unit, Machhilipatnam, relevant excerpt whereof is as under:
"..2. In this regard, it is to inform that this office had not received the RTI application dated 22.02.2024, as referenced in CIC File No. CIC/NHAIN/A/2024/122527, prior to the receipt of this communication. Consequently, no information could be furnished earlier in response to the said application.
3. However, taking into the information given by the RO office with regard to the above said appeal, this Office has now examined the matter and made the relevant correspondence as requested by you with the departments of Government of Puducherry such as 1. Public Works Department, Yanam, 2. The Revenue Department and 3..."
Details of information have been duly enclosed with the submission, stating that: "A total of 73 nos. of encroachments have been identified, and corresponding notices have been issued to the encroachers, directing them to vacate the encroachments within seven (07) days. Copies of four (04) such notices are enclosed herewith for information.
If the applicant requires copies of all 73 notices, a fee of Rs. 178/- [i.e., Rs. 146/- towards photocopying charges (@ Rs. 2/- per A4/A3 size page for 73 pages), and Rs. 32/- towards postal charges (@ Rs. 32/- per 500 grams)]"
A written submission dated 05.05.2025 has been received from the CPIO, Executive Engineer, Regional Officer, Vijaywada relevant excerpt whereof is as under:
"..i. The application was made through hard copy only which was misplaced in this office, hence action on the appeal could not be taken. ii. Upon getting the CIC notices this office immediately ordered the concerned CPIO to furnish the relevant information to the applicant. iii. Accordingly, the CPIO cum PD PIU Machilipatnam has given the information available with him to the applicant vide letter dated 03.05.2025 (Copy attached). iv. It is to submit that this office has transferred/disposed 190 RTI applications/Appeals in 16 months without any lapses. v. Furthermore, since the reply has been furnished by the CPIO, the appeal is also disposed of vide this office letter dated 05.05.2025 (Copy attached). vi. It is to submit that delay occurred in disposal of instant appeal is unintentional and accidental only: Hence the delay in disposal of RTI appeal may kindly be condoned.
The CPIO has stated that queries of the Appellant have been replied as per information available on record, in terms of provisions of the RTI Act. Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.
Appellant: Present through video conference Respondent: Shri B S Sreenivasan - Project Director, Project Implementation Unit, Machhilipatnam and Shri Shashank Shekhar Rai - CPIO, Regional Officer were present through video conference during hearing.
Both parties reiterated their respective contentions with the Respondent stating that information available on record had been duly furnished to the Appellant, in terms of the RTI Act. The Appellant stated that he had received information partially.Page 2 of 3
Decision:
Perusal of records of the instant case reveals that the Respondent had furnished whatever information is available on records with them, as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, in terms of the provisions of the Act. Considering the fact that the response of the PIO is legally accurate and well within the precincts of the RTI Act, no further intervention is warranted in this case, under the RTI Act.
The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 of 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)