Naresh Kadyan vs Rajghat Samadhi Committee on 30 November, 2021

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Naresh Kadyan vs Rajghat Samadhi Committee on 30 November, 2021

Bench: Heeralal Samariya

                             केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                       Central Information Commission
                         बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
                        Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                        नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

दितीय अपील संख्या/Second Appeal No.:    CIC/RSCOM/A/2020/679532

                                                    .....अपीलकताा /Appellant
 Naresh Kadyan



                                 VERSUS/बनाम


 1. Public Information Officer Under RTI,
 Rajghat Samadhi Committee,
 Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs,
 Mahatma Gandhi Road, Rajghat,
 New Delhi-110002.


 2. Nodal Public Information Officer Under RTI,
 Section Officer-(RTI Cell),
 Ministry of Housing & Urban
 Affairs, Room No.-501, C-Wing,
 Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi-110011.




                                                    ...प्रदतवािीगण/Respondents


Relevant facts emerging from appeal:


  RTI application filed on        : 10-06-2020
 CPIO replied on                   :   12-06-2020
First appeal filed on             :   Not on Record
First Appellate Authority order   :   Not on Record
Second Appeal received at CIC     :   Nil
Date of Hearing                   :   29.11.2021
Date of Decision                  :   29.11.2021



                  सूचना आयुक्त   : श्री हीरालाल सामररया
           Information Commissioner:    Shri Heeralal Samariya



Information sought

The Appellant sought following information:

PIO furnished reply, vide letter dated 12-06-2020 as under:

Dissatisfied with the response received from PIO, Appellant filed First Appeal, vide letter dated .

Written submissions have been received from PIO (Rajghat Samadhi Committee), vide letter dated 16.11.2021, as under:

Grounds for Second Appeal:

The PIO has not provided information to the Appellant.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:

The following were present: -

Appellant: present in person Respondent: Ms Neelam Kumari, Asstt. Caretaker Appellant stated that he has not received any reply from the PIO till date.

Upon Commissions instance, PIO submitted that a detailed written submission dated 16.11.2021 enumerating all the details has been submitted for the perusal of the Commission. He further affirmed that he would abide by the orders of the Commission.

Appellant interjected to state that he has not received any letter.

Upon Commissions instance, copy of written submission enclosed with all the documents has been provided to the appellant during the course of hearing.

Decision Commission has gone through the case records and observes that appropriate has been provided to the Appellant by the PIO (Rajghat Samadhi Committee) and same is upheld. No further action lies.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Information Commissioner (सू चना आयु क्त) Authenticated true copy (अदिप्रमादणतसत्यादपतप्रदत) Ram Parkash Grover (रामप्रकाशग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26180514

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission