Central Information Commission
Mrgopal Kansara vs Ministry Of Home Affairs on 12 February, 2016
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi110067
Decision No. CIC/VS/A/2014/002818/SB
Dated 12.02.2016
Appellant : Shri Gopal Kansara,
S/o Late Shri Uday Lal Ji,
P.O. Deogarh Madariya313331
District Rajsamand,
Rajasthan.
Respondent : Central Public Information Officer
Ministry of Home Affairs,
North Block, New Delhi110 001.
Date of Hearing : 12.02.2016
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI application filed on : 28.05.2014
CPIO's reply : 16.06.2014
First Appeal filed on : 21.06.2014
FAA's Order on : 15.07.2014
Second Appeal filed on : 05.09.2014
ORDER
1. Shri Gopal Kansara filed an application dated 28.05.2014 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) seeking information pertaining to Anti Sikh Riots in 1984 on twelve points including (i) details of the inputs or intelligence based on which action was taken without the approval of the then President of India and (ii) whether before launch of such operation, permission of the President of India is necessary under the law.
2. The appellant filed second appeal dated 05.09.2014 before the Commission on the ground that the CPIO had sought additional fee at the rate of Rs.2 per page for photo copy charges but he could not succeed in depositing the additional fee in spite of his best efforts. Hearing:
3. The appellant Shri Gopal Kansara attended the hearing through video conferencing. The respondent Shri Suman Chatterjee, Under Secretary, MHA was present in person.
4. The appellant submitted that complete and correct information has not been provided to him by the respondent.
5. The respondent submitted that the information sought has been provided to the appellant vide letter dated 16.06.2014. The respondent further submitted that with regard to information sought in point no. 4 the appellant has been asked to deposit the requisite fee by the CPIO and the FAA has vide its order dated 15.07.2014 clarified to the appellant the total number of pages for which the appellant has to deposit the fee. Decision:
6. The Commission after hearing the parties and upon perusal of records observes that information sought has been provided to the appellant by the respondent.
7. With the above observation, the appeal is disposed of.
8. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Sudhir Bhargava) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (V.K. Sharma) Designated Officer