Central Information Commission
Pragati Tiwari Nayak vs Office Of Development Commissioner ... on 26 December, 2024
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/DCSSI/A/2023/656133
Ms. Pragati Tiwari Nayak ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Office of Development Commissioner (Micro Small
and Medium Enterprises)
Date of Hearing : 19.12.2024
Date of Decision : 19.12.2024
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 20.11.2023
PIO replied on : 19.12.2023
First Appeal filed on : 19.12.2023
First Appellate Order on : 22.12.2023
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 23.12.2023
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 20.11.2023 seeking information on following points:-
01. "Name and designation of competent officer under whom my MSME Samadhan Application No. UDYAM-UP-28- 0012075/M/00001 is pending with.
02. Number of days since the filing of my MSME Samadhan Application UDYAM-UP- 28-0012075/M/00001 is pending without any action.
03. Copy of all the communication with The Petitioner (Pragati Tiwari Nayak) by the MSME Council (Zonal MSEFC Meerut) till date (20th Nov'2023).
04. Copy of all the communication with The Respondent (KALYAN DOMBIVALI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION) by the MSME Council (Zonal MSEFC Meerut) till date (20th Nov 2023).
05. Copy of Action Taken Report by the MSME Council (Zonal MSEFC Meerut) till date (20th Nov 2023) for my application UDYAM-
UP-28-0012075/M/00001.
06. Copy of converted Case No. & other case details for my MSME Samadhan Application UDYAM-UP-28-0012075/M/00001."
Page 1 The CPIO, Office of Development Commissioner (Micro Small and Medium Enterprises) vide letter dated 19.12.2023 replied as under:-
"Ministry does not maintain such information. However, the status of file application on Samadhaan can be tracked at the link:
https://samadhaan.msme.gov.in/MyMsme/MSEFC/MSEFC_Wel come.aspx."
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 19.12.2023. The FAA vide order dated 22.12.2023 upheld the reply of CPIO.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Written submission dated 18.12.2024 has been received from the CPIO and same has been taken on record for perusal. The relevant extract whereof is as under:
With reference to the RTI Application No. DCSSI/R/T/23/00364, dated 21.11.2023, received by the than CPIO, it is submitted that Micro & Small Enterprises Facilitation Councils (MSEFCs) have been set up in States/UTs to deal with cases of delayed payments of Micro and Small Enterprises (MSEs) under the provisions of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development (MSMED) Act, 2006. Ministry of MSME launched SAMADHAAN Portal on 30.10.2017 (http://samadhaan.msme.gov.in/MyMSME/MSEFC/ MSEFCWelcomer.aspx.) for monitoring of outstanding dues to MSEs from the buyers of goods and services. The MSEFCs are run and maintained by the States/UTs Governments. This office does not maintained the details of cases handled by MSEFCs.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Not present Respondent: Mr. Mohit Kumar Gautam, Assistant Director EI- participated in the hearing.
The Respondent reiterated the averments made in their written submission and stated that the relevant information from their official record has been duly provided to the Appellant. He stated that MSEFCs are run and maintained by the States/UTs Governments. He averred that their office does not maintain the details of cases handled by MSEFCs.
Decision:
At the outset, Commission directs the concerned PIO to furnish a copy of their latest written submission along with annexures if any, to the RTI Applicant, free of cost via speed-post and via e-mail, within 07 days from the Page 2 date of receipt of this order and accordingly, compliance report be sent to the Commission.
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made during hearing, the Commission is of the view that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been provided by the Respondent. Commission notes that 'information' as defined in the section 2(f) of the Act, only refers to such material as is already available in the records of the public authority. Furthermore, the RTI Act, 2005 does not cast an obligation upon the public authority, to create or collate such non-available information and then furnish it to an applicant. Moreover, written submission filed by the Respondent is comprehensive and self-explanatory. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the instant matter.
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 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)