Central Information Commission
Mr.Madhav Balwant Karmarkar vs Ministry Of Finance on 29 October, 2010
dsUnzh; lwpuk vk;ksx
Central Information Commission
2 ry] foxa 'c' / 2nd Floor, 'B' Wing
vxLr ØkfUr Hkou / August Kranti Bhavan
Hkhdkth dkek Iysl / Bhikaji Cama Place
ubZ fnYyh 110066 / New Delhi - 110066
Dated: 29.10.2010
Proceeding in Complaint No. CIC/AT/C/2010/000738 Present: Shri A.N. Tiwari Present: , Chief Information Commissioner Complainant: Shri M.B. Karmarkar Respondents: Stressed Assets Stabilization Fund Shri M.B. Karmarkar of Pune has filed this complaint dated 8.7.2010 before the Commission against the Stressed Assets Stabilization Fund (SASF), Mumbai for not providing information to his two RTI-requests dated 7.1.2010 and 5.2.2010 and first- appeals dated 27.2.2010 and 10.3.2010 respectively.
2. Perused papers submitted by the complainant, it is observed that complainant after getting no response from CPIO, the complainant preferred first-appeals before first- appellate authority on 27.2.2010 and 10.3.2010 respectively for deemed refusal to his RTI- requests. The AA, SASF vide order No. 18/10-11 dated 11.6.2010 has directed the CPIO to furnish the information to the complainant within 5 days.
3. In order to avoid multiple proceedings under sections 19 and 18 of the RTI Act, viz., appeals and complaints, the matter is remitted to CPIO, Stressed Assets Stabilization Fund (SASF), 9th Floor, IDBI Tower, WTC Complex, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005 (enclosing copy of the complaint and RTI-requests) with the following directions:
i) In case no reply has been given by CPIO to the complainant to his two RTI-
requests dated 7.1.2010 and 5.2.2010, CPIO should furnish replies to the complainant within two week of receipt of this order.
ii) In case CPIO has already given replies to the complainant in the matter, he should furnish copies of his replies to the complainant within one week of receipt of this order.
iii) CPIO should invariably indicate to the complainant the name and address of the 1st Appellate Authority, before whom the complainant can file first-appeal, if any.
iv) Copies of CPIO's reply should also be endorsed to the Commission.
4. In case the complainant is not satisfied with the reply received from CPIO, he, under section 19(1) of the RTI Act, may within the time prescribed, file his first-appeal before the AA.
5. On receipt of the first appeal from the petitioner as per the above directions, AA should dispose of the appeal within the period stipulated in the RTI Act.
6. In case complainant still feels aggrieved by the decision of AA, he shall be free to approach the Commission in second appeal under section 19(3), along with complaint u/s 18, if any, within the prescribed time limit.
7. The matter is closed with the above directions.
Sd/ (A.N. Tiwari) Chief Information Commissioner