Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Dhanshyam Patel vs Ministry Of Home Affairs on 7 November, 2022

                                  के   ीय सूचना आयोग
                         Central Information Commission
                              बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
                         Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                          नई द ली,
                                ली New Delhi - 110067

ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MHOME/A/2021/624687

Shri Dhanshyam Patel                                        ... अपीलकता /Appellant
                                VERSUS/बनाम

PIO, Ministry of Home Affairs                         ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Through: Shri Pandey Pradeep Kumar-DS; Shri
Praveen Kumar Yadav - DS and Shri Salil Kumar
- ASO
Date of Hearing                      :   02.11.2022
Date of Decision                     :   07.11.2022
Chief Information Commissioner       :   Shri Y. K. Sinha

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on             :   19.04.2021
PIO replied on                       :   18.05.2021
First Appeal filed on                :   22.05.2021
First Appellate Order on             :   11.06.2021
2ndAppeal/complaint dated            :   17.06.2021
 Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19.04.2021 seeking information on 08 points, some of which are:-

Etc. The PIO/Dy. Secretary(Public), MHA vide letter dated 18.05.2021 replied as under:-

The documents mentioned in the PIO's reply are found enclosed with the reply. Still dissatisfied issatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 22.05.2021. The FAA/Jt. Secretary(P Secretary(P-1)

1) vide order dated 11.06.2021 upheld the reply of the CPIO.

Aggrieved and dissatisfied,, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

A written submission has been received from the Appellant reiterating his contentions and seeking additional information related to the queries raised in the RTI application.

Hearing is held through video conference upon serving notice of hearing in advance adva to both parties. Both parties are heard through video conference and reiterated their respective contentions, as already noted above. The Appellant emphatically sought additional documents related to the queries raised by him in the RTI application. Respondent contended that hat information available on record with the public authority as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act had been duly furnished to the Appellant and if any additional documents are traceable, the same shall be furnished in response to the Appellant's qu query.

Decision:

Upon perusal of records of the case it is noted that information as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act has been duly provided by the Respondent. Considering the averments made by the Respondent during hearing, further time is granted grante to the Respondent to send any additional information relevant to the queries raised by the Appellant within six weeks. The Respondent shall submit a compliance report before the Commission in this regard by 30.12.2022.

The appeal is disposed off on the these terms.

Y. K. Sinha (वाई.

वाई. के . िस हा) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)/011-26186535 26186535 Page 2 of 2