Central Information Commission
Ved Prakash Gupta vs Ministry Of Culture on 28 November, 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/MCULT/A/2022/104179 -UM
Mr. Ved Prakash Gupta
....अपीलकताा/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO
The CPIO/Nodal Officer(RTI Cell)
National Monuments Authority, Ministry of Culture,
24, Tilak Marg, New Delhi - 110001
प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 22.11.2022
Date of Decision : 28.11.2022
Date of RTI application 20.10.2021
CPIO's response 14.12.2021
Date of the First Appeal 22.11.2021
First Appellate Authority's response Not on record
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission 31.01.2022
ORDER
FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information, as under:-
The CPIO vide letter dated 14.12.2021, furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal. The order of the FAA, if any, is not on the record of the Commission.Page 1 of 2
Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.
HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Present through AC Respondent: Mr R N Srivastava , Mr N Mahapatra System Analyst, Present in Person The Respondent submitted that the Appellant had sought his own property related details along with those of few others. He said that they had furnished the information pertaining to the Appellant and rejected sharing the details of the third parties. The Appellant said that he has not received any information pertaining to even his own property and further clarified that other parties whose property details he had sought are his immediate neighbours who filed a court case against him. Hence in order to produce as evidence in court case he requires this information.
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission directs the CPIO to furnish correct, cogent and precise reply pertaining to the property of the Appellant, redacting the personal details of the third parties, strictly in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 30 days from the receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.
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-पजं ीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 28.11.2022 Page 2 of 2