Rahul Kumar Meena vs Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cca) , ... on 4 August, 2021

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Rahul Kumar Meena vs Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax (Cca) , ... on 4 August, 2021

Bench: Neeraj Kumar Gupta

                               केन्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
                         Central Information Commission
                         बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
                         Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                         नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

नितीयअपीलसंख्या/Second Appeal No.CIC/CCITH/A/2019/659762

Mr. Rahul Kumar Meena                             ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
                                   VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO                                                     ...प्रनतवािी/Respondent
O/o. the Commissioner of Central
Tax, Ranga Reddy GST
Commissionerate, AC, Posnett
Bhawan, Tilak Road, Ramkote,
Hyderabad-500001
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:-

RTI : 30-06-2019            FA     : 31-08-2019          SA       : 13-12-2019

CPIO : 08-08-2019           FAO : 24-09-2019             Hearing: 03-08-2021

                                  ORDER

1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO)O/o. the Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad.The appellant seeking information is as under:-

1. "Copy of RTI Application dated 22.12.2017 received by O/o the Commissioner of Central Tax, Ranga Reddy GST Commissionerate and reply thereof by your Department/office, as mentioned/stated in Para 6 of the reply affidavit.

2. Copy of all note sheet and correspondence pages of the file through which the aforesaid RTI Application dated 22.12.2017 was processed."

2. As the CPIO had not provided the requested information, the appellant filed the first appeal dated 08.08.2019 requesting that the information should be provided to him. The first appellate authority upholds CPIO's reply vide FAO dated 24.09.2019 and disposed of his first appeal. He filed a second appeal Page 1 of 3 u/Section 19(3) of the RTI Act before the Commission on the ground that information has not been provided to him and requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide complete and correct information.

Hearing:

3. The appellant attended the hearing through audio-call. The respondent, Shri G V Madhava, CPIO attended the hearing through audio-call.

4. The appellant submitted that the desired information has not been provided to him by the respondent on his RTI application dated 30.06.2019.

5. The respondent submitted that vide their letter dated 08.08.2019, they have informed the Appellant that the information sought pertains to the third party under section 11 of the RTI Act and accordingly a notice to the third party as per the provisions of the RTI Act was issued. He further submitted that the third party has requested their office not to reveal his identity and the RTI Application filed by him also not to be disclosed, therefore the information sought could not be provided to the Appellant.

6. On being asked by the Commission as to why such information has been sought by the Appellant, the Appellant has replied that the said RTI Application dated 22.12.2017 has been filed against him, hence he sought such information.

Decision:

7. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records, observes that the appellant has sought information regarding a copy of the RTI Application dated 22.12.2017 including copy of all note sheet and correspondence pages through which the aforesaid RTI Application dated 22.12.2017 was processed. It has been informed that the said RTI Application dated 22.12.2017 is made by the third party to the respondent public authority. The Appellant has pressed upon to provide a copy of the said RTI Application as it is filed against him. The concerned CPIO has invoked section 11 of the RTI Application as it is a third party's application, therefore cannot be provided to the appellant.

8. In the light of the above observations, the Commission is of the view that the CPIOs reply is in order and the same is being upheld. Therefore, the Appeal is hereby dropped.

9. No further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.

10. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.

Page 2 of 3

11. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.


                                      Neeraj Kumar Gupta (नीरजकुमारगुप्ता)
                                   Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयुक्त)

                                                 निनां क / Date       : 03-08-2021
Authenticated true copy
(अनिप्रमानितसत्यानपतप्रनत)

S. C. Sharma (एस. सी. शमाग ),
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक),
(011-26105682)


Addresses of the parties:

1.    CPIO

O/o. the Commissioner of Central Tax, Ranga Reddy GST Commissionerate, AC, Posnett Bhawan, Tilak Road, Ramkote, Hyderabad-500001

2. Mr. Rahul Kumar Meena Page 3 of 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission