Central Information Commission
Varun Krishna vs Spmcil Corporate Office on 23 November, 2021
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क य सुचना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मुिनरका, नई द ली- 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
File no.: CIC/SPMCO/C/2019/640890
In the matter of:
Varun Krishna
... Complainant
VS
Central Public Information Officer
Security Printing & Minting Corporation of India
16th Floor, Jawahar Vyapar Bhawan,
Janpath, New Delhi - 110 011
...Respondent
RTI application filed on : 30/03/2019 CPIO replied on : 29/04/2019 First appeal filed on : Not on Record First Appellate Authority order : Not on Record Complaint dated : 19/05/2019 Date of Hearing : 23/11/2021 Date of Decision : 23/11/2021 The following were present:
Complainant: Not present Respondent: Shri Siddharth Srivastava, Deputy Manager(HR) & CPIO, present over intra VC.
Information Sought:
The complainant has sought the following information pertaining to letter issued to Shri V. Balaji vide Ref No. CHO(HR)/RTI/10-7/2015/Vol.IV/6218 dated 24.01.2019:
1. Copy of approval received from competent authority as mentioned in the letter dated 24.01.2019, referred to above.
2. Copies of all documents which were prepared, executed, issued, and received.1
Grounds for filing Complaint:
The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
Submissions made by Complainant and Respondent during Hearing:
The complainant was not present to plead his case despite service of hearing notice on 30.10.2021 vide speed post acknowledgment No. ED958941347IN. However, in his complaint he had stated the PIO had obstructed the information deliberately, therefore strictures must be passed and penalty may be imposed on the concerned CPIO.
The CPIO, submitted that an appropriate reply was given to the complainant on 29.04.2019. He also reiterated the contents of his written submissions dated 22.11.2021.
Observations:
From a perusal of the relevant case records, it is noted that an appropriate reply was given to the complainant on 29.04.2019. The Commission is unable to find any flaw in the reply so given as the desired information as asked for was given within the stipulated time period and no aspersions of malafide or intentional obstruction can be construed from the behaviour of the CPIO. The Commission does not find any malafide intention on the part of the concerned CPIO nor is there any reason to pass any strictures against the CPIO, hence, the complaint is not established.
Decision:
In view of the above, the Commission upholds the reply of the CPIO and does not find any scope for further intervention in the matter.
The complaint is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मा णत स या पत ित) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182594 / दनांक/ Date 2