Central Information Commission
Shri. Kishanlal Mittal vs Central Information Commission on 12 March, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000853/SG/17636
Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000853/SG
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Kishan Lal Mittal
1305, Dhruv, Ashok Van, Borivali East,
Mumbai-400066
Respondent : Mr. S. S. Padmanabha
CPIO & Dy. Secretary Central Information Commission 2nd Floor, 'B' Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066 RTI application filed on : 17/11/2010 PIO replied : 15/12/2010 First appeal filed on : 29/12/2010 First Appellate Authority order : 08/02/2011 Second Appeal received on : 03/03/2011 Information Sought:
a) Kindly provide registration of following 2nd appeals/complaints filed in CIC:
(i) Kishanlal Mittal vs Election Commission dated 3/11/2010.
(ii) Kishanlal Mittal vs. 581 dated 08/11/2010.
(iii) Kishanlal Mittal vs. CIC dated 08/11/2010-2 cases
(iv) Kishanlal Mittal vs. CVC dated 2/11/2010
(v) Kishanlal vs. National Committee for Promotion of Social and Economic Welfare, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi 110 001 dated 15th May, 2010.
(vi) Kishanlal Mittal vs. Cabinet Secretariat dated 14/08/2010.
(vii) Kishanlal Mittal vs Ministry of Home dated 23/08/2010.
(viii) Kishanlal Mittal vs. BIS dated 15/11/2010
(ix) Kishanlal Mittal vs.Supreme Court dated 15/11/2010.
(x) Kishanlal Mittal vs.Bank of Maharashtra dated 15/11/2010.
b) Kindly provide diary ifs of each of the above appeals with details of daily movement from the day it is received and diarized with noting of each officer through with the file passes before it is finally registered.
c) Kindly provide statement showing pending cases in various registries and also ministry wise pending in each registry.
d) Kindly provide information on current status on dak digitization.
e) Kindly provide information on draft rules on RTI received from Government of India and CICs response thereon.Page 1 of 3
f) Kindly provide information with file noting on non compliance in cases CIC/AT/A/2009/000428- DS & CIC/DS/C/2010/00029.
g) When was the hearing on the case CIC/LS/A/2010/001246 scheduled? Kindly provide copies of the hearing notices issued and copy of the decision note?
h) Did the hearing take place in case CIC/AT/A/2010/000280? Kindly provide copies of decision note in the case.
i) Kindly provide information on cases since 2009 in which full/multi member bench has been constituted and which are pending decision. Kindly provide information with file noting.
j) Kindly provide information on minutes of meeting of CIC dated 3" August 2010.
k) Kindly provide information on compliance of section 4 by CIC. If the details are available on web, kindly provide links to compliance of each subsection of section 4 and details when the same were last updated.
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO):
Sh. T.K. Mohapatra, Under Secy. & CPIO of the Registry of Hon'ble IC (DS) has informed that: "Point (1) & (2): One letter dated 08/11/2010 has been received from Sh. Kishanlal Mittal in the Registry of IC(DS). This is a complaint of non-compliance of Commission's order in case no. CIC/DS/C/2010/000029. This has been diarized as diary no. 81626 dated 23/11/2010. This is under consideration.
Point (6): File No. CIC/AT/A/2009/000428-DS concerned with Sh. Girish Mittal not with the applicant. There are 3 pages of noting in the file no. CIC/AT/A/2009/000428 and 3 pages of noting in CIC/DS/C/2010/000029. Copy of noting can be provided to you payment @ Rs. 2/- per page is made to the Commission.
Sh. S. Padmanabha, Under Secretary si Deputy Registrar of the Registry of Hon'ble IC (SS) has informed that:
"Point (1) (vii): The case has been registered as CIC/SS/A/2010/000874. Point (1) (viii): The case has been received in this registry today and the case is yet to be scrutinized.
Point (2): Diary no. of the case mentioned in a (vii) above is 60523 dated 10/09/2010; Diary No. of the case mentioned in a (viii) above is 87145 dated 10/12/2010. As regard noting of the officers on the appeals it is stated that as regard the case CIC/SS/A/2010/000874, the only noting recorded on the receipt is "Home/IC (SS)" recorded by Central Registry. As regard the noting on the other case received in the registry vide diary no. 87145 dt. 12/10/2010, noting recorded on the receipts is as under".
"Detached from Dy. No.81829 dated / 23.11.2010 from the Registry of IC(SM) on 09/12/2010 transferred to Central Registry. Received back from Registry of IC(SM) on 09/12/2010 IC (SS) 87145 /10.12.2010)"
"Point (1) (i): As per data management system letter dated 03/11/2010 has not been received in the Commission. Point (iii): Two letter dated 08/11/2010 has been received on 12/11/2010 in the Commission vide diary no. 81624 dated 23/11/2010 and 81623 dated 23/11/2010 and it has been received in the registry of Chief IC on 25/11/2010. As on date of reply, no action has been contemplated except placing it on record. Point (iv): Two letter of applicant dated 02/11/2010 has been received on 12/11/2010 in the Commission vide diary no. 8i6i8 dated 23/11/2010 and 81618 dated 23/11/2010 and it has been received in the Registry of Chief IC on 25/11/2010. As on date of reply, no action has been contemplated except placing it on record. Point (vi): As per data management system letter dated 14/08/2010 has not been received in the Commission. Point (ix): As on date as per data management system letter dated 15/11/20 10 has not been received in the Commission.
Point (2): Already responded at (1)".
Sh. D. C. Singh, Deputy Registrar & CPIO of the Registry of Hon'ble CIC (AT) has informed that :"Point (1) (ii) : The petition dated 08/11/2010 against SBI was diarized vide Diary No. 81621 dated 23/11/2010. An appeal has been registered and the Case No. is CIC/AT/A/2olo/oolo3l. The matter is yet to be processed. There is no other such movement recorded in the file.
Point (1) (iii): No such petition dated 08/11/2010 against CIC has been received in this Registry. Point (1) (iv): No such petition dated 02/11/2010 against CVC has been received in this Registry. Point (1) (v): No such petition dated 15/05/2010 has been received in this Registry. Point (1) (wi): No such petition dated 14/08/2010 against Cabinet Secretariat has been received in this Registry. Point (1) (ix): No such petition dated 15/11/2010 against Supreme Court has been received in this Registry. Point (2): Already mentioned against (1) (ii).
Point (6): The Case No. CIC/AT/A/2009/000428 has been transferred to the Registry of IC(SM) on 01/06/2009.
Page 2 of 3Point (8): Yes. The decision is yet to be passed in the matter".
Sh. Vijay Rhalla, Assistant Registrar & CPIO of the Registry of Hon'ble IC(SM) has informed that: "Point (1)
(x): Your complaint dated 15/11/2010 has been received in the Commission's office and has been diarized under diary no. 81829. The complaint has been registered in file No. CIC/SM/C/2010/001174.
Sh. K.L. Das, Assistant Registrar & CPIO of the Registry of Hon'ble IC (LS) has 'informed that: "Point (7): It is stated that the hearing of the case was held on 27/09/2010. A copy of each of the hearing notice dated 06/09/2010 and order dated 27/09/2010 is enclosed, as desired".
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The FAA disposed of the appeal and directed the PIO to provide the requisite information for certain queries within 15 working days to the Appellant. Further, the FAA also stated that: "Thus, the CPIO is right in segregating the requests into more than one. Hence, I hold that paras (a)(i), a(iii), a(iv), a(v), a(ix), (b), (d) & (h), being on the same issue are rightly treated as single application. However, CPTO is advised that letter dated 2/12/2010 to the appellant should have been a speaking order giving reasons for considering paras mentioned above as one request and denying information on the remaining queries. Thus, the appeal on this ground is rejected."
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Mr. S. S. Padmanabha, CPIO & Dy. Secretary alongwith other officers;
The PIO had stated that query (a), (b), (f), (g) & (h) consisted of one subject matter and hence separate application fee would have to be paid by the Appellant for the other queries. The PIO had given this decision consequent to the decision no. WB/A/2008/01256 dated 18/07/2008 given by the Chief Information Commissioner.
The PIO states that he has provided the information as per records.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
Information available on the records appears to have been provided. This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 12 March 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (IN) Page 3 of 3