Central Information Commission
Arabaz Ansar Pathan vs Department Of Legal Affairs on 23 March, 2022
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/DOLAF/A/2021/602885
Arabaz Ansar Pathan ......अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Department of Legal Affairs,
RTI Cell, Shastri Bhawan,
New Delhi - 110001. .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 22/03/2022
Date of Decision : 22/03/2022
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 19/01/2021
CPIO replied on : 19/01/2021
First appeal filed on : 19/01/2021
First Appellate Authority order : 21/01/2021
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 01/02/2021
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an online RTI application dated 19.01.2021 seeking the following information:
"I would like to request you to provide me the detailed information about Shariyat law. What is the process of Marriage according to shariyat? What are the contracts and guidelines of marriage in shariyat for Muslims?1
Provide details Who are the authorities under the shariyat act to issue nikahmana of the marriages? Who appoints the person to issue nikahnama? What is the process of appointment of concerned authority for issuing nikahnama? What is the validity of the Nikahnama? Provide details. Is nikahnama valid for availing the government services like change in name in adhar card of bride, registration at grampanchayat? Provide detailed information where can one use the nikahnama and for what use? Is there any ideal/common proforma of nikahnama? If yes then please provide."
The CPIO replied to the appellant on 19.01.2021 stating as follows:-
"As per the Government of India (Allocation of Business) Rules, 1961, the basic function of this Department is to, inter-alia, tender advice to Ministries/Departments on Legal matters.
The information sought is in the nature of queries amounting to seeking legal advice and hence not covered u/s 2(f) of the RTI, 2005. Moreover, this Department does not give legal advice to private individuals."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 19.01.2021. FAA's order dated 21.01.2021 upheld the reply of CPIO.. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The Commission observed that the Appellant vide his written submission dated 21.03.2022 has intimated that he is satisfied with the CPIO's reply and desires to withdraw the instant case.
Decision:
In view of the Appellant's intimation, the Commission closes the case.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोजपुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) 2 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 3