Central Information Commission
Pankaj Chaturvedi vs Defence Research And Development ... on 12 April, 2023
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क ीय सुचना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मुिनरका,
नरका नई द ली - 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
File no.: CIC/DRADO/A/2022/625352
In the matter of
Pankaj Chaturvedi
... Appellant
VS
1. The CPIO
Ordnance Factory, Chanda
Distt. Chandrapur - 442 501
2. The CPIO
Ministry of Defence
DOO (Coord & Services)
(earlier Ordnance Factory Board)
10-A, S K Bose Road
Kolkata - 700 001
... Respondents
RTI application filed on : 08/12/2021 CPIO replied on : Not on record First appeal filed on : 07/02/2022 First Appellate Authority order : Not on record Second Appeal filed on : 05/05/2022 Date of Hearing : 12/04/2023 Date of Decision : 12/04/2023 The following were present:
Appellant: Present over VC Respondent: S.K Behera, Deputy Director and CPIO, present over VC Information Sought:
The Appellant has sought the following information:
1. Provide a copy of the approved noting through which the competent authority disposed of his representation dated 17/11/2017. It was informed to 1 him by Ordnance Factory Board vide speaking order No. CM/TR/PER/NG/215 dated 13/02/2020.
2. Provide status along with copy of approved noting in respect of his representation dated 19/12/2021, forwarded by Ordnance Factory Chanda to Ordnance Factory Board.
3. Provide copies of OFB letter No. DJWM-17/Tech (Mech)/Per/GB dated 22-11-2017 and OFB letter No. DJWM/DPC/2021/PER/GR dated. 22/07/2021.
4. And other related information.
Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information. Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:
The appellant submitted that he received no reply till date. Both CPIOs, i.e CPIO OF Kolkata and Chanda submitted that they had not received the RTI application.
The CPIO Kolkata reiterated the written submissions dated 10.04.2023 and submitted that the concerned division had replied on 10.04.2023 alongwith 22 pages documents. On a query he submitted that the same was sent through e- mail, however, it transpired during the hearing that the e-mail id was incorrect and hence the same was not received by the appellant. Observations:
CPIO, Directorate of Planning and Coordination was the authority to whom the online RTI application was filed. Therefore, the receipt or non receipt by the CPIO, OF Kolkata could not be verified. Be that as it may, the CPIO can resend the information via speed post as well as to the correct e-mail id. Decision:
The CPIO is accordingly directed to send a point-wise reply alongwith the 22 pages documents, within 7 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
वनजा एन.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन सरना) सरना सूचना आयु ) Information Commissioner (सू 2 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के . असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011- 26182594 / दनांक / Date 3