Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

A R Shashi Kumar vs Ministry Of Home Affairs on 21 March, 2023

                                 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/2022/118888

Shri A R Shashi Kumar                                        ... अपीलकता /Appellant
                                  VERSUS/बनाम

PIO                                                    ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Directorate of Census Operations, Karnataka

Date of Hearing                       :   16.03.2023
Date of Decision                      :   21.03.2023
Chief Information Commissioner        :   Shri Y. K. Sinha

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on              :   08.10.2021
PIO replied on                        :   26.10.2021
First Appeal filed on                 :   10.01.2022
First Appellate Order on              :   18.02.2022
2ndAppeal/complaint received on       :   21.04.2022

Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated08.10.2021 seeking certified copies of census report district wise for Karnataka State for the period 1947 to 2021, pertaining to Scheduled Caste (Beda Jangam).

The CPIO/Assistant Director (T), Directorate of Census Operations, Karnataka, vide letter dated 26.10.2021 replied as under:-

The CPIO/Assistant Director (T), Directorate of Census Operations, Karnataka, vide letter dated 23.11.2021 furnished another reply.

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 10.01.2022. The FAA/Joint Director,Directorate of Census Operations, Karnataka, vide order dated 18.02.2022 stated as under:-

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

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

The Appellant remained absent during the hearing despite prior intimation.

The Respondent represented by Shri Bijesh, CPIO and Assistant Director and Shri Jaypragasam, FAA and Jt Director participated in the hearing despite prior intimation. Shri Bijesh reiterated the replies available on record and stated that the Appellant did not appear before the FAA to substantiate his allegation regarding blank CD provided to him hence his case was dismissed ex parte.

Decision:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the Respondent and in the light of the fact that the Appellant was not present during the hearing to substantiate his claims, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the instant matter. For redressal of his grievance, the Appellant is advised to approach an appropriate forum.

With the above observation, the instant Second Appeal stands disposed off accordingly.

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 Page 3 of 3