Central Information Commission
Dr. J. V. Singh vs Office Of The Additional Distt. ... on 23 February, 2021
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील सख्ं या / Second Appeal No.: CIC/ADDDM/A/2019/102411
Dr. J. V. Singh .....अपीलकर्ता/Appellant
VERSUS/बनतम
PIO,
District Nodal Officer-(PC &PNDT Cell-West),
Officeof the District Magistrate(Government of
NCT ofDelhi), West District, PlotNo.-3, Shivaji
Palace, RajouriGarden, New Delhi-110027
...प्रतर्वतदीगण/Respondent
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 01-09-2018
CPIO replied on : 25-10-2018
First appeal filed on : 20-10-2018
First Appellate Authority order : Not on record
Second Appeal received at CIC : 16-01-2019
Date of Hearing : 23-02-2021
Date of Decision : 23-02-2021
lwpuk vk;qDr : Jh हीरालाल सामररया
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER: Shri Heeralal Samariya
Information sought:
The Appellant sought following 03 points information related to PC-PNDT:
1. Please supply certified true copy of the "Daily Diary Register" of DM Office (from D.D. No. 480 to 490) by which DM office orders/letters were supplied to their subordinates for the date of Second, Third & Fourth March 2016.
2. Please supply certified true copy of the "Daily Diary Register" of SDM Office, Rajouri Garden by which this office received DM orders/letters for the date of Second, Third & Fourth March 2016.Page 1 of 3
3. Please supply certified true copy of the "Daily Diary Register" of PNDT Cell by which this office received DM orders/letters for the date of Second, Third & Fourth March 2016.
Having not received any reply from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 20-10-2018 which was also not adjudicated by the First Appellate Authority. Therefore, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The PIO has provided misleading information to the Appellant. Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present: -
Appellant: not present Respondent: not present The Appellant submitted, vide letter dated 23.02.2021, that he could not appear in person on the date of hearing.
The Respondent submitted, vide letter dated 11.02.2021, that a petition case, Dr. Tarun Kothari V/s District Appropriate Authority West, WPC 1808/202, is pending in the Hon'ble High Court, with next date of hearing on 23.02.2021. Hence, the Respondent could not appear in person before the Commission on the date assigned (23.02.2021) Remark:
Owning to the no. of backlog of cases, Commission finds it expedient to decide the instant case on merits.
Decision:
Commission has gone through the case records and on the basis of proceedings during hearing observes that information sought by the appellant was denied by the PIO under Section 8(1)(j), 8(1)(h), 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act, 2005 which is deemed apt. However, considering the fact that appellant only desires to know the relevant information pertaining to him thus, Commission directs the PIO to provide the relevant information only limiting to the appellant, free of cost. Further, PIO must redact/blackout any third-party information disclosure of which would cause an unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the concerned third party.Page 2 of 3
The aforementioned direction of the commission must be compliedwithin 15 days of receipt of this order and send a compliance report of the same to the Commission.
The appeal is disposed off accordingly
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालालसामररया)
Information Commissioner(सच ु )
ू नाआयक्त
Authenticated true copy
(अभिप्रमाणितसत्यापितप्रतत)
Ram Parkash Grover (रतम प्रकतश ग्रोवर)
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
011-26180514
Page 3 of 3