Central Information Commission
Mr.Om Parkash vs Department Of Atomic Energy on 8 March, 2013
Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No.CIC/SM/A/2012/001545
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 8 March 2013
Date of decision : 8 March 2013
Name of the Appellant : Shri Om Parkash,
S/o. Late Shri Chattar Pal Singh,
Jeevapuri - 6, Near Hydel Colony, PO
Napp Narora, P S Narora, Distt.
Bulandshahar202389, U.P.
Name of the Public Authority : Central Public Information Officer,
Directorate of Purchase & Store,
Vikram Sarabhai Bhavan,
Anushaktinagar,
Mumbai - 400 094
On behalf of the Appellant, the following were present.
(i) Shri Sudhanshu Nayak
(ii) Shri Anant Sharma
On behalf of the Respondent, Shri L. K. Gupta was present.
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra
2. A representative of the Appellant was present in our chamber. The Respondent was present in the Mumbai studio of the NIC. CIC/SM/A/2012/001545
3. The Appellant had raised a very large number of queries seeking a variety of information relating to the nonpayment of dues against some material supplied long time back. The CPIO had not provided any information as such except observing that the payment against the purchase order stood released. He had treated most of the queries as seeking explanation or reasons for certain action/inaction and observed that he was not required to offer any such explanation. The Appellate Authority had, while endorsing the response of the CPIO, given some further clarification.
4. It was argued on behalf of the Appellant that the CPIO had not provided satisfactory information and that the entire payment due to the Appellant as a supplier had not yet been made. On the other hand, the respondent explained the sequence of payments made against the purchase order and claimed that all the payment had since been made and nothing remained pending.
5. We have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submissions made before us. The Appellant seems to be aggrieved that while 80% of the payment had been made initially, only part of the remaining 20% was released nearly 11 years later. According to the Respondent, however, the payments were made strictly according to the terms of the agreement. If that is so, in the interest of transparency, the Appellant should be informed with the help of documents that full payments have been made and strictly in conformity with the terms of the agreement. We direct the CPIO to write to the Appellant within 10 working days of receiving this order and to provide him with the relevant documents to show that not only the payment has been made in full but also that the delayed release of the remaining 20% of payment was not on account CIC/SM/A/2012/001545 any lapse on the part of the department.
7. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
8. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra) Chief Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla) Deputy Registrar CIC/SM/A/2012/001545