Central Information Commission
Mrr K Jain vs Central Information Commission on 6 May, 2016
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi110066
Decision No. CIC/YA/C/2014/000221/SB
Dated 06.05.2016
Complainant : Shri R.K. Jain,
1512B, Bhishm Pitamah Marg,
Wazir Nagar, New Delhi110 003.
Respondent : The Central Public Information Officer,
Central Information Commission, 2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi110066.
Date of Hearing : 06.05.2016
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI application filed on : 07.02.2014
First Appeal : 15.03.2014
Complaint filed on : 18.03.2014
Order
1. Shri R.K. Jain filed an application dated 07.02.2014 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Central Information Commission (CIC) seeking information on five points regarding Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs)/Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (APARs), including (i) list of officers whose CIC/YA/C/2014/000221/SB Page 1 ACR/APAR are not being written/reviewed by their immediate superior as per All India Service (Performance Appraisal Report), Rules 2007 and directions of the DoPT alongwith copies of the orders of the Chief Information Commissioner/Secretary to the CIC under which prescribed channel of reporting/reviewing have been deviated and name and designation of the officials who have written/reviewed the ACR/APAR of Joint Secretaries, Directors, Deputy Secretaries, Deputy Registrar, Sr. PPS and PPS of the CIC from the year 2007 till date and (ii) list of ACR/APAR pending with the Reporting Officer/Reviewing Officer as on 01.02.2014.
2. The complainant filed a complaint dated 18.03.2014 before the Commission on the ground that the CPIO, CIC has deliberately, malafidely and persistently not provided the information inspite of the clear mandate of the RTI Act even though the information sought was readily available with them and was not exempted under Section 8 or 9 or any other provisions of the RTI Act.
Hearing:
3. The complainant Shri R.K. Jain and the respondent Shri Y.K. Singhal, JSLaw, CIC were present in person.
4. The complainant vide letter dated 06.05.2016 has submitted that due to passage of time, he has decided not to press for this matter.
Decision:
5. The complaint is hereby dismissed as 'Not pressed'.
6. Copy of the decision to be provided to both the parties free of cost.
CIC/YA/C/2014/000221/SB Page 2
(Sudhir Bhargava)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(V.K. Sharma)
Designated Officer
CIC/YA/C/2014/000221/SB Page 3