Rajkumar Yadav vs Rajghat Samadhi Committee on 29 June, 2022

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Rajkumar Yadav vs Rajghat Samadhi Committee on 29 June, 2022

Bench: Heeralal Samariya

                             के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                      Central Information Commission
                          बाबा गंगनाथ मागग ,मुननरका
                       Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                       नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

 शिकायतसंख्या/Complaint No.:        CIC/RSCOM/C/2021/602060

 Rajkumar Yadav                                         ...शिकायतकताा/Complainant

                                    VERSUS/बनाम

   1. Public Information Officer Under RTI,
      Assistant Care Taker, Rajghat Samadhi Committee,
      (Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs),
      Behind Radfort, Mahatma Gandhi Road,
      Rajghat, New Delhi-110002.

                                                        ...प्रशतवािीगण/Respondents

Relevant facts emerging from Complaint:

  RTI application filed on          :   22.09.2020
  CPIO replied on                   :   15.10.2020
  First appeal filed on             :   31.10.2020
  First Appellate Authority order   :   Not on record
  Complaint received at CIC         :   17.01.2021
  Date of Hearing                   :   29.06.2022
  Date of Decision                  :   29.06.2022

                   सूचना आयुक्त    : श्री हीरालाल सामररया
             Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya


  Information sought

The Complainant sought information:

Page 1 of 3

• CPIO reply dated 15.10.2020:

• Written submission of the PIO dated 17.06.2022:

Grounds for Complaint The PIO has not provided correct information to the Appellant.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:

The following were present: -

Complainant: present on phone Respondent: Ms. Neelam Kumari, Assistant Caretaker & PIO, present in person.

Complainant reiterated the factual matrix of his case and stated that he has not received any information from the PIO.

Upon Commissions instance, PIO submitted that a written submission enumerating all the details has been submitted for the perusal of the Commission on 17.06.2022 and copy of the same was send to the Complainant as well. She further affirmed that she would abide by the orders of the Commission.

Page 2 of 3

Decision:

Commission has gone through the case records and on the basis of proceedings during hearing observes that relevant reply was provided to the Complainant by the CPIO on 15.10.2020. Further, CPIO in the written submission dated 17.06.2022 has enumerated the factual position in response to the information sought by the complainant.

In the light of the above observations, no malafide intention can be ascribed on the part of the CPIO. Thus, no action is warranted in the instant matter.

However, CPIO is directed to furnish the copy of the WS dated 17.06.2022 to the complainant, free of cost, via speed/registered post, within 07 days from the date of receipt of this order and accordingly compliance report to this effect be duly sent to the Commission by the CPIO. Further, CPIO must make sure that any third-party information or any other information which is exempted from disclosure under RTI Act, 2005 shall not be disclosed to the complainant while providing the said letter.

The Complaint is disposed of accordingly.



                                           Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल  सामररया)
                                         Information Commissioner (सच       ु )
                                                                    ू ना आयक्त
Authenticated true copy
(अनिप्रमानितसत्यानितप्रनत)



Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाि ग्रोवर)
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
011-26180514




                                                                         Page 3 of 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission