Central Information Commission
Ranjan Powari vs Archaeological Survey Of India on 29 July, 2022
Author: Uday Mahurkar
Bench: Uday Mahurkar
के न्द्रीय सच
ू ना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
द्वितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/ALSOI/A/2021/633922-UM
Mr. Ranjan Powari
....अपीलकताा/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO
Archaeological Survey of India (ASI)
Dharohar Bhawan, 24, Tilak Marg,
New Delhi - 110001
प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 28.07.2022
Date of Decision : 29.07.2022
Date of RTI application 05.03.2021
CPIO's response Not on record
Date of the First Appeal 11.04.2021
First Appellate Authority's response Not on record
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission 12.07.2021
ORDER
FACTS The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on 03 points, as under:-
Dissatisfied due to non-receipt of any response from the CPIO, the Appellant approached the FAA. The order of the FAA, if any, is not on the record of the Commission. Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission. HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Present through AC Respondent: Mr. S K Singh Ast. Supt Archaeology Present through AC The Appellant while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application submitted that partial and misleading information has been furnished to him. He stated that he had sought information regarding the departments to whom notices have been issued by ASI for undertaking new construction or repair in prohibited and regulated area of Narbadeshwar Temple in year 2019. He informed that his dwelling house is nearby the said temple, around which many illegal buildings are being raised which in turn are affecting his old building . He claimed that according to the rules and regulations, prior permission has to be taken from ASI before carrying out any such construction within 300 meters of the said temple. But as per his knowledge many constructions are being carried out without taking the permission.
The Respondent submitted that a suitable reply as per the provisions of the RTI Act has been furnished to the Appellant .
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission observes that the matter pertains to public interest. Therefore the Commission directs the CPIO to re-examine and furnish a revised reply to the Appellant strictly in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 21 days from the date of receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission. The Commission further directs the CPIO to submit a written submission before the Commission, explaining the reason for not furnishing the information in a time bound manner, along with the comments of the First Appellate Authority, both by post and by uploading to http://dsscic.nic.in/online-link-paper-compliance/add. The above directions shall be complied with within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order under intimation to the Commission.
The Appeal stands disposed accordingly.
(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर) ू ना आयुक्त) (Information Commissioner) (सच Authenticated true copy (अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर. के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 / [email protected] द्वदनांक / Date: 29.07.2022