Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Janak Lal Sahoo vs Gnctd on 20 October, 2022

Author: Uday Mahurkar

Bench: Uday Mahurkar

                                       के न्द्रीयसच
                                                  ू नाआयोग
                             Central Information Commission
                                     बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
                              Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                                नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

द्वितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/GNCTD/A/2022/123619 -UM

Mr. Janak Lal Sahoo
                                                                            ....अपीलकताा/Appellant
                                            VERSUS
                                              बनाम



   1. CPIO
      O/o The PIO & Senior System Analyst,
      Department of Food Supplies and Consumer Affairs,
      GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI K-Block, VikasBhawan,
      I P Estate, New Delhi -110002

   2. CPIO
      O/o The Commissioner, Distribution Branch
      Department of Food Supplies and Consumer Affairs,
      GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI, K-Block, Vikas Bhawan,
      I P Estate, New Delhi -110002.
                                                                            प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing       :             11.10.2022
Date of Decision      :             18.10.2022

Date of RTI application                                                   18.01.2022
CPIO's response                                                           10.02.2022
Date of the First Appeal                                                  08.03.2022
First Appellate Authority's response                                      22.04.2022
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission                      19.05.2022

                                           ORDER

FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information on 10 points, as under:-

The CPIO vide letter dated 10.02.2022, furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal. The FAA vide order dated 22.04.2022, disposed off the First Appeal.

Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: Absent Respondent: Mr. Lalit Kumar ASO, Mr. Mohit Himan J.A and Mr. Manish J.A, present in the hearing.

The Appellant remained absent during the hearing. The Respondent while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application stated that the Appellant had sought information regarding ration card scheme etc. He submitted that vide letter dated 10.02.2022 and 03.03.2022 they had furnished a reply as per record available in their office. He stated that remaining information pertains to the policy branch. Hence, no further information remained to be provided to the Appellant, he said.

The Commission was in receipt of a written submission by the Respondent dated 06.10.2022 which is taken on record.

The Appellant was not present to contest the submissions of the Respondent.

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the Respondent, the Commission observes that the information sought pertained to policy branch has not been provided. Therefore, the Commission directs the CPIO to collect the information from policy branch and furnish a complete and an updated revised reply to the Appellant, strictly in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 21 days from the receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission. For the redressal of his grievance, if any, the Appellant may approach an appropriate forum.

The Appeal stands disposed accordingly.

(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर) ू ना आयुक्त) (Information Commissioner) (सच Authenticated true copy (अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनाक ं / Date: 18.10.2022 Page 3 of 3