Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

D. Dhananjaya vs Archaeological Survey Of India on 19 April, 2022

Author: Uday Mahurkar

Bench: Uday Mahurkar

                                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/ALSOI/A/2021/100407-UM

Mr. D. Dhananjaya
                                                            ....अपीलकताग/Appellant
                                      VERSUS
                                       बनाम
CPIO
Archaeological Survey of India
O/o The Supdt Archaeologist
Hampi Circle, Kamalapur - 585313
                                                          ....प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing     :           07.04.2022
Date of Decision    :           19.04.2022



Date of RTI application                                         26.09.2020
CPIO's response                                                 05.10.2020
Date of the First Appeal                                        13.10.2020
First Appellate Authority's response                            Not on record
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission            05.01.2021

                                     ORDER

FACTS The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on following points, as under:-

The CPIO, Archaeological Survey of India, vide letter dated 05.10.2020 furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal, which was not adjudicated by the First Appellate Authority. Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission with a request to take immediate action against the concerned authorities and direct them to issue information immediately and punish them as per the Act and give respect to the RTI Act at an early date and oblige.
HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: The appellant attended the hearing. Respondent: The respondent Ms. Prema KC, Assistant Superintending Archaeology The Appellant reiterated the contents of the RTI application and submitted that false and misleading information was provided by the CPIO. The Respondent present during the hearing submitted that suitable response in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, had already been furnished to the Appellant.
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties and after perusal of the documents available on record, the Commission directs the CPIO to seek clarification on his RTI queries from the appellant within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. The Commission also advises the appellant to specify the queries, information sought and period of the information. After receiving the clarification from the appellant, the respondent shall provide the information strictly in keeping 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 Appeal stands disposed accordingly.
(Uday Mahurkar) (उिय माहूरकर) (Information Commissioner) (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणित एवं सत्यापित प्रतत) (R. K. Rao) (आर. के. राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 / [email protected] दिनांक / Date: 19.04.2022