Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Nutan Thakur vs Department Of Personnel & Training on 26 February, 2020

                               के ीय सूचना आयोग
                         Central Information Commission
                            बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
                          Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                          नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067

File No : CIC/DOP&T/A/2018/141403

Nutan Thakur                                                  ....अपीलकता/Appellant
                                      VERSUS
                                       बनाम
CPIO,
Department of Personnel & Training,
North Block,
New Delhi - 110001.                                      ... ितवादीगण /Respondent

RTI application filed on          :   03/02/2018
CPIO replied on                   :   01/03/2018
First appeal filed on             :   06/03/2018
First Appellate Authority order   :   11/04/2018
Second Appeal dated               :   25/06/2018
Date of Hearing                   :   12/02/2020
Date of Decision                  :   26/02/2020

            lwpuk vk;qDr              :       fnO; izdk"k flUgk
   INFORMATION COMMISSIONER :             DIVYA PRAKASH SINHA

Information sought

:

The Appellant sought information pertaining to the legal opinion sought by DOPT from the AG Sri Venugopal about the Bofors case, including the note sheet and the correspondence between DOPT and various other offices.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
1
Appellant: Present through VC.
Respondent: S.P.R. Tripathi, US & CPIO and Pankaj Kumar Jha, SO, Department of Personnel & Training, North Block, New Delhi present in person.
Appellant stated that she is not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO. She further stated that CPIO arbitrarily denied the information sought in the instant RTI Application by misconstruing Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act.
CPIO submitted that information sought by the Appellant in the instant RTI Application is held in a fiduciary capacity and was denied under section 8 (1)(e) of the RTI Act and that the same also pertains to references made by CBI, which is an exempted organization, therefore Section 24(1) of RTI Act is applicable in the matter. He further submitted that a similar case has been already heard and decided by the Commission vide order no. CIC/DOP&T/A/2018/142912/SD dated 06.01.2020 wherein the same stand of the CPIO was upheld.

Decision Commission observes upon detailed scrutiny of facts on record that the instant case is squarely covered by the decision in File No.CIC/DOP&T/A/2018/142912 dated 06.01.2020, hence no separate action is warranted in the matter.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Divya Prakash Sinha ( द काश िस हा ) Information Commissioner ( सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अ भ मा णत स या पत त) Haro Prasad Sen SignatureDy.

Not Verified Registrar 011-26106140 / [email protected] Digitally signed हरो by User साद सेन, उप-पंजीयक Date: 2020.02.26 17:50:17 IST दनांक / Date 2