Central Information Commission
Kanhaiya Singh vs Geological Survey Of India on 19 June, 2019
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/GSIND/A/2017/181074
Kanhaiya Singh ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
1. CPIO, Geological Survey of ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondents
India, Faridabad, Haryana.
2. CPIO, Geological Survey of
India, Northern Region,
Lucknow.
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 17.08.2017 FA : 13.10.2017 SA : 30.11.2017
CPIO : 28.08.2017 FAO : 03.11.2017 Hearing : 17.06.2019
ORDER
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Geological Survey of India (GSI), Faridabad seeking information on two points pertaining to his Page 1 of 4 pension and Service Book, including, inter-alia, (i) status of his application dated 23.07.2017 in respect of fixation of his pension with reference to Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Dept. of P&P Welfare, F. No. 38/37/2016-17-P&PW(A) dated 06.07.2017, and (ii) complete and updated Service Book of the applicant along with his complete Pension File.
2. The appellant filed a second appeal before the Commission on the grounds that the APIO, GSI Faridabad returned his RTI application vide letter dated 28.08.2017 stating that validity of IPO has expired. Subsequently, he deposited the fee of Rs. 10 in cash along with his original RTI application to the APIO. However, the CPIO, GSI NR, Lucknow vide letter dated 22.09.2017 rejected the RTI application on the plea that the receipt of RTI fee is only payable through IPO/DD/Cash. Nonetheless, the FAA vide order dated 03.11.2017 directed the CPIO, GSI NR, Lucknow to furnish the information to the applicant. However, no information/reply has been furnished to him till date by the CPIO, GSI, NR, Lucknow in compliance of the FAA's order. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the information sought for and to impose penalty upon the CPIO for willfully denying the desired information to him.
Hearing:
3. The appellant Shri Kanhaiya Singh was present in person and the respondent Shri Vachaspati Srivastava, Director and APIO, Geological Survey of India, Faridabad were present in person. The respondent Shri Vivek Bhole, Director, GSI, Northern Region, Lucknow attended the hearing through video-conferencing.Page 2 of 4
4. The appellant submitted that he has, since, received the information sought by him. Hence, he does not want to pursue the matter further. He, therefore, requested the Commission to drop the proceedings in respect of his second appeal.
Decision:
5. The second appeal is hereby dismissed as 'Withdrawn'.
6. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
Sudhir Bhargava (सुधीर भागगव) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) दिनांक / Date 18.06.2019 Authenticated true copy (अनभप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. S. Rohilla (एस. एस. रोनिल्ला) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 / [email protected] Page 3 of 4 Addresses of the parties:
1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) Geological Survey of India, Northern Region, Sector-E Aliganj, Lucknow- 226024.
2. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Geological Survey of India, Northern Region, Sector-E Aliganj, Lucknow- 226024.
3. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Geological Survey of India, NH 5P, NIT Faridabad, Haryana.
4. Shri Kanhaiya Singh Page 4 of 4