Central Information Commission
Mrsurinder Kumar vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation ... on 10 June, 2016
Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No. CIC/SH/C/2015/000145
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (18)
Date of hearing : 10th June 2016
Date of decision : 10th June 2016
Name of the Complainant : Shri Surinder Kumar,
St. No. 1, H. No. 4/126, Gobind Nagari,
Malout, DisttSri Muktsar Sahib, Punjab
Name of the Public : Central Public Information Officer,
Authority/Respondent Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.,
Bathinda Retail Regional Office: HPCL
Outlet, Mansa Road, Phoos Mandi,
Bathinda151001
RTI Application filed on : 12/01/2015
CPIO replied on : __
First Appeal filed on : __
First Appellate Authority order on : __
Complaint received on : 13/03/2015
The Complainant was not present.
On behalf of the Respondents, Shri Rajiv Bansal, Senior Regional Manager was
present at the NIC Studio, Bathinda.
Information Commissioner : Shri Sharat Sabharwal
Information sought
CIC/SH/C/2015/000145 This matter concerns an RTI application filed by the Complainant, seeking information on three points regarding details of persons to whom retail outlets were allotted in the name & style of Hamara Pump and related issues.
The CPIO reply No reply given.
Grounds of complaint to the Commission No information provided.
Relevant facts emerging during the hearing, Discussion and Decision.
The Respondents stated that the RTI application dated 12.1.2015 was not received by the CPIO. However, when the Complainant filed a complaint to the Commission, he forwarded a copy of the same to the CPIO, along with a copy of the RTI application. This was received by the CPIO on 9.3.2015 and he gave a pointwise reply on 16.3.2015. The Respondents further submitted that the Appellant has filed around five RTI applications and the information admissible for disclosure under the RTI Act has been provided to him. The Complainant was not present in spite of a written notice having been sent to him to substantiate his complaint or make a submission regarding any shortcoming(s) in the reply sent by the CPIO on 16.3.2015.
2. In view of the foregoing, further enquiry in to this complaint is not considered necessary.
CIC/SH/C/2015/000145
3. With the above observations, the complaint is disposed of.
4. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
Sd/ (Sharat Sabharwal) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla) Deputy Registrar CIC/SH/C/2015/000145