Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Rama Nand Singh vs Ministry Of Home Affairs on 15 January, 2021

                                के ीयसूचनाआयोग
                       Central Information Commission
                             बाबागंगनाथमाग, मुिनरका
                       Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                         नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067

ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MHOME/A/2018/153052

Shri Ramanand Singh                                           ... अपीलकता/Appellant
                                  VERSUS/बनाम

PIO, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi                ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Through: Sh. S K Gupta

Date of Hearing                      :     14.01.2021
Date of Decision                     :     15.01.2021
Chief Information Commissioner       :     Shri Y. K. Sinha

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on              :    07.05.2018
PIO replied on                        :    -
First Appeal filed on                 :    13.06.2018
First Appellate Order on              :    -
2ndAppeal/complaint received on       :    28.08.2018

Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 07.05.2018 seeking reasons for not complying with the order of First Appellate Authority dated 13.07.2016 and information related to PPO No. S/C 15749-POL.

Having not received any information from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.06.2018 and the same remained unheard.

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

A written submission has been received from the CPIO, MHA vide letter dated 05.01.2021 placing reliance on an earlier RTI application dated 20.04.2016 filed by the same Appellant on the same subject matter. Second Appeal filed with respect to the said RTI application was heard by this Commission as case number CIC/MHOME/A/2016/301429 on 31.07.2017 and the directions given by the Commission vide the said order dated 31.07.2017 were duly complied with vide reply dated 25.10.2017.

With respect to the instant case at hand, the Respondent has averred that vide reply dated 14.08.2018, the RTI application dated 07.05.2018 was duly replied to.

The First Appeal dated 13.06.2018 was adjudicated vide order dated 30.08.2018, upholding PIO's reply dated 14.08.2018.

In order to ensure social distancing and prevent the spread of the pandemic, COVID-19, video hearing has been scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties. Respondent alone is present for the virtual hearing while Appellant has not attended the video conference. The Respondent explained that wife of the Appellant had been availing of pension fraudulently. When this was brought to the notice of the competent authority, after due enquiry her pension was discontinued and recovery proceedings were initiated. Consequently, the Appellant has been filing numerous cases against the Respondent while he never attends any of the proceedings.

Decision:

Upon taking note of the facts of the case from perusal of records and averments of the Respondent, the Commission is satisfied that information sought by the Appellant had been duly provided by the Respondent. Appellant has not appeared to buttress his case or to explain the cause of his dissatisfaction with the information provided to him. The Second Appeal filed by him also does not clearly establish his case.

Under the circumstances, the instant appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Y. K. Sinha ( वाई. के . िस हा) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 2 of 2