Central Information Commission
Mr.Subash Nayak vs National Highways Authority Of India ... on 30 August, 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: 30.8.2010
Proceeding in Complaint No. CIC/AT/C/2010/000395 Present: Shri A.N. Tiwari Present: , Central Information Commissioner Complainant: Shri Subhash Nayak Respondents: National Highways Authority of India Shri Subhash Nayak of Dist. Dhenkanal (Orissa) has filed this complaint dated 10.5.2010 before the Commission against National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), Bhubaneswar for not providing information to his RTI-request dated 13.9.2007 addressed to PIO, Public Works Departmnet, Govt.of Orissa, Bhubaneswar.
2. Perused papers submitted by the complainant, it is observed that the complainant through RTI-request dated 13.9.2007 addressed to PIO, PWD, Govt. of Orisssa had sought information regarding justification of providing bypass for Bhuban Town on NH-200. The complainant had filed his second-appeal before the Orissa Information Commission, Bhubaneswar for deemed refusal of his RTI-request. The State Information Commission vide their order dated 2.3.2010 has observed that the required information could not be supplied to the appellant as the same was related to the Project Director, NHAI, PIU, Bhubaneswar, which is a Central Government Department and the PIO, Public Works Department, Bhubaneswar had transferred the RTI-application dated 13.9.2007 to Project Director & CPIO, NHAI, PIU, Bhubaneswar vide letter dated 21.9.2007.
3. The Project Director, NHAI, Bhubaneswar vide letter No. NHAI/14011/6/2007/PIU/BBSR/6987 dated 2.11.2007 has requested the holder of information i.e. Team Leader, M/s. Intercontinental Consultants and Technocrats Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi to submit the necessary information so that the same could be transmitted to the complainant and the Public Works Department, Government of Orissa, Bhubaneswar.
4. In order to avoid multiple proceedings under sections 19 and 18 of the RTI Act, viz., appeals and complaints, the matter is remitted to Project Director & CPIO, National Highways Authority of India, PIU, N-2/173, I.R.C. Village, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar-751015, (enclosing therewith a copy of complaint and RTI-request), with the following directions :
i) In case no reply has been given by CPIO to the complainant to his RTI-
request dated 13.9.2007, CPIO should furnish a reply to the complainant within two week of receipt of this order.
ii) In case CPIO has already given a reply to the complainant in the matter, he should furnish a copy of his reply 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) A copy of CPIO's reply should also be endorsed to the Commission.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. The matter is closed with the above directions.
Sd/ (A.N. Tiwari) Information Commissioner