Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Naresh Kadyan vs Central Zoo Authority, New Delhi on 24 January, 2022

Author: Uday Mahurkar

Bench: Uday Mahurkar

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

द्वितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/CZAUR/A/2021/609800 -UM

Mr. Naresh Kadyan

                                                                      ....अपीलकताा/Appellant

                                        VERSUS
                                          बनाम

CPIO,
Central Zoo Authority,
B-1 Wing, 6th Floor,
Pt. Deen Dayal Antyodaya Bhawan,
CGO Complex, Pragati Vihar,
New Delhi -110003
                                                                 ....प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing     :            20.01.2022
Date of Decision    :            21.01.2022



Date of RTI application                                               26.12.2020
CPIO's response                                                       18.01.2021
Date of the First Appeal                                              18.01.2021
First Appellate Authority's response                                  15.02.2021
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission                  Nil



                                       ORDER

FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information on 15 points, as under:-

The CPIO vide letter dated 18.01.2021, 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 15.02.2021, dispose 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: The appellant attended the hearing. Respondent: The respondent was not present despite notice.

The respondent remained absent during the hearing despite notice. The appellant during the hearing requested the Commission to decide his matters on merit.

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and after perusal of the documents available on record, the Commission directs the Respondent to furnish updated, concise and complete information to the Appellant, in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 21 days from the date of receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.

Moreover, the Commission takes a serious view of the absence of the CPIO, Central Zoo Authority, Pragati Vihar, New Delhi despite the notice. The Commission directs him to submit a written statement before the Commission, explaining his absence, along with the comments of the First Appellate Authority, before 21.02.2022 both by post and by uploading on http://dsscic.nic.in/online-link-paper-compliance/add.

The Appeal stands disposed accordingly.

(UdayMahurkar) (उदयमाहूरकर) (Information Commissioner) (सच ू नाआयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अद्विप्रमाद्वणतएवंसत्याद्वपतप्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 21.01.2022 Page 3 of 3