Central Information Commission
Ashok Kumar Goyal vs Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Limited ... on 27 March, 2026
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/ONGCL/C/2025/107382
Ashok Kumar Goyal ....निकायतकताग /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd.,
Deendayal Urja Bhawan, Vasant Kunj,
New Delhi - 110070
....प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 25-03-2026
Date of Interim Decision : 25-03-2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Khushwant Singh Sethi
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 20-11-2024
CPIO replied on :
First appeal filed on : 20-01-2025
First Appellate Authority's order :
Complaint dated : 05-03-2025
CIC/ONGCL/C/2025/107382 Page 1 of 5
Information sought:
1. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 20-11-2024 seeking the following information:
""कृपया श्री अविजित गुप्ता मैटेरियल मैनेिमेन्ट ऑफीसि, सी०एम०िी०सी०पी०डी० ओ०एन०िी०सी० 8िीीं मींजिल स्कोप मीनाि, लक्ष्मीनगि दिल्ली ईस्ट की ननम्नललखित सूचनायें उपलब्ध किाने का कष्ट किें ।
1. दिल्ली में काययभाि ग्रहण किने की नतथि।
2. स्िानान्तिण यात्रा भत्ता (अहमिाबाि से दिल्ली) में शालमल सिस्यों की सींख्या।
3. स्ियीं के ऊपि आथश्रत िशायये गये सिस्यों का विििण।
4. विगत 5 िर्षों में आथश्रत सिस्यों के उपचाि में हुये व्यय की प्रनतपूनतय का विििण।
5. क्या अपनी चल/अचल सम्पवत्त का विििण विभाग को दिया है।
6. विभाग को सूथचत ननिास स्िल का पता।
7. क्या इनके द्िािा शेयसय की ट्रे डडींग/फ्यूचि ऑप्सन / म्यूचुअल फण्ड / एस०आई०पी० में बडा विननयोग किने की अनुमनत विभाग से ली गई है।
8. क्या क्रिलमनल केसेस में गिाही / विटनेस िे ने की अनुमनत इनके द्िािा कभी प्राप्त की गई है।"
2. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 20-01-2025, FAA's order, which is not adjudicated as per the record of the Commission.
CIC/ONGCL/C/2025/107382 Page 2 of 53. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Facts emerging in course of Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant: Attended the hearing through video conference. Respondent: Ms. Seema Milred Bara, GM (HR) & CPIO, attended the hearing in person.
4. The Complainant stated that he sought information regarding date of joining, details of members shown as dependent of Shri Avijit Gupta, Material Management Officer, CMGCPD ONGC etc. The complainant submitted that the respondent had not accepted the fee of Rs. 20/- paid in cash. Thereafter, he had sent IPO to the respondent on 06.11.2024. However, the respondent had replied to him on 10.09.2025 after a delay of around 09 months.
5. The Respondent submitted that initially they had denied the cash of Rs. 20/- paid by the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant paid the fee through IPO on 06.11.2024. The respondent further submitted that the sought information was denied U/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
6. The Commission queried the respondent as to why she didn't accept the fee paid in cash by the complainant. To this, the respondent did not give any satisfactory response. The Commission queried the respondent for giving delayed response to the complainant despite receiving the IPO. To this, the respondent did not give any satisfactory response.
Interim Decision CIC/ONGCL/C/2025/107382 Page 3 of 5
7. The Commission, after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, observes that the complainant sought information about third-party and the same is exempted U/s 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. The Commission finds that the respondent had wrongly denied the fees paid in cash by the complainant. As per the RTI Rules, 2012, fee paid in cash is a valid mode of payment. Also, the respondent had provided reply to the complainant after a delay of around 09 months despite receiving the IPO. In view of the above, the respondent is hereby SHOW-CAUSED as to why penalty U/s 20(1) of the RTI Act should not be imposed upon her for wrongly denying the fee paid in cash and for providing the reply after a delay of around 09 months despite receiving the IPO. The respondent is directed to submit detailed written explanation to the Commission for the aforesaid reasons - both through post and via uploading on http://dsscic.nic.in/online-link-paper-compliance/add within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. Accordingly, the complaint is reserved for further orders.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
(Khushwant Singh Sethi) (खुशवन्त स िंह ेठी) Information Commissioner ( ूचना आयुक्त) निनां क/Date: 25.03.2026 Authenticated true copy S. K. Chitkara (एस. के. नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26107026 CIC/ONGCL/C/2025/107382 Page 4 of 5 Copy To:
1. The CPIO Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., Deendayal Urja Bhawan, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi - 110070
2. The FAA, Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., Deendayal Urja Bhawan, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi - 110070
3. Ashok Kumar Goyal CIC/ONGCL/C/2025/107382 Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)