Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

D Dhananjaya vs Archaeological Survey Of India on 27 June, 2022

Author: Uday Mahurkar

Bench: Uday Mahurkar

                                       के न्द्रीयसच
                                                  ू नाआयोग
                             Central Information Commission
                                     बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
                             Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                               नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

द्वितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/ALSOI/A/2021/115059 -UM

Mr.D Dhananjaya
                                                                       ....अपीलकताा/Appellant
                                            VERSUS
                                              बनाम



CPIO,
Archaeological Survey of India,
Office of the Supdt. Archaeologist Hampi Circle,
Kamalapur- 583221



                                                                       प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing      :              23.06.2022
Date of Decision     :              27.06.2022

Date of RTI application                                               23.01.2021
CPIO's response                                                       05.02.2021
Date of the First Appeal                                              12.02.2021
First Appellate Authority's response                                  Not on record
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission                  Nil

                                           ORDER

FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information, as under:-

The CPIO vide letter dated 05.02.2021, furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal. 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: Absent Respondent: Ms Prema K C Assistant Supertending Archaeology Present through AC The Appellant remained absent during the hearing. Inspite of several efforts made by the Commission he could not be connected. The Respondent said that the Appellant came for the inspection of records dated 20.06.2022 in which complete information has been provided to him.

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the respondent and on the perusal of the documents on record, the Commission observes that an apt reply has been given by the Respondent therefore no further intervention is required by 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-पजं ीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 27.06.2022 Page 2 of 2