Central Information Commission
Sk Rabiul Hossain vs National Human Rights Commission on 21 March, 2024
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईदिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/NHRCM/A/2023/630181
Shri SK Rabiul Hossain ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, National Human Rights Commission ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 19.03.2024
Date of Decision : 19.03.2024
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 01.04.2023
PIO replied on : 27.04.2023
First Appeal filed on : 27.04.2023
First Appellate Order on : 02.05.2023
2 Appeal/complaint received on
nd : 20.06.2023
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 01.04.2023 seeking information on following points:-
"I made a complain to NHRC with diary no 5006/IN/2023 on 25/03/2023 against Case No. 278/25/11/2023 which is already close. But on 31/03/2023 this diary no 5006/IN/2023 is transfer to Case No. 278/25/11/2023. So I need some information regarding diary no 5006/IN/2023 as follow
1. Why the diary no 5006/IN/2023 is transfer to Case No. 278/25/11/2023 as the case already close and one thing I am complaining against Case No. 278/25/11/2023.
2. As Case No. 278/25/11/2023 is close on 03/02/2023 so how can I track my attach diary no 5006/IN/2023 which shows that application is close.
3. Provide the NHRC guideline for attaching a diary to Close Case no.
4. Need all supporting documents (certified copy) which type of action being taken regarding my complaint."Page 1 of 3
The PIO& Consultant (Section Officer), National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi vide letter dated 27.04.2023 replied as under:-
"Point 1 & 3
2.It is to inform that NHRC is functioning as per Protection of Human Rights Act 1993 and the NHRC (Procedure) Amendment Regulations, 1997 and the same can be accessed in the NHRC web-site i.e. www.nhrc.nic.in.
Point 2 &4
3. As regards, tracking of online complaints through HRCNet portal, following steps may be used:
i) Enter URL https://hrcnet.nic.in on device
ii) Click on "Search Complaint" to open Search Form.
iii) Enter Diary Number or any other input/ information as mentioned on search form.
iv) Enter captcha and click on "Search" button
v) Relevant output/search result will be displayed below in tabular format.
Click on "View" option to see details. A new page will be opened to show case/complaint details. PDF containing case/complaint details for diary No.5006/IN/2023 is enclosed for reference."
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 27.04.2023. The FAA vide order dated 02.05.2023 stated as under:-
"Perusal of the record reveals that the online RTI request sent by the appellant was received on 01.04.2023, and the information has been provided by the PIO on 27.04.2023, i.e. within 30 days of the statutory time limit provided under RTI Act. The appellant had mentioned in his RTI application as to why the diary No. 5006/IN/2023 was transferred to case No. 278/25/11/2023 and how can he track his diary No. 5006/IN/2023 which showed that the application is closed. He had also requested to provide NHRC guidelines for attaching a diary number to close case number and to supply certified copies of all the supporting documents.
The record reveals that the appellant has already been supplied certified copies of the case details of case file No. 278/25/11/2023 and the documents showing procedure to search a complaint. Attaching a particular diary to its relevant case number is a prevalent practice in this Commission for which no laid down guidelines are maintained. Attention of the appellant is also invited towards the decision dated 03.04.2018 delivered by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay & Goa in Writ Petition No. 419 of 2007 in the case of Dr. Celsa Pinto Vs. Goa State Information Commission, that the definition of information cannot include within its fold the answer to the question why.Page 2 of 3
As the available information has already been provided to the appellant, the appeal has no merit and the same is dismissed."
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
A written submission has been received from the PIO and Assistant Registrar (Law), NHRC vide letter dated 06.03.2024 wherein the replies available on record were reiterated. A copy of the written submission was also forwarded to the Appellant.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Present Respondent: Shri Gautam Kumar, Asst Registrar The Appellant stated that the information provided to him was not satisfactory. He added that the complaint referred in the instant RTI application was incorreclt merged with an earlier complaint and closed.
Shri Gautam Kumar reiterated his written submission and stated that complete information as per available record was provided to the Appellant which is self explanatory.
Decision:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission is of the view that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been provided by the Respondent. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the instant matter. With the above observation, the instant Second Appeal stands disposed off accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 of 3