Central Information Commission
Deepak Sandhu vs Department Of Personnel & Training on 12 January, 2023
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/DOP&T/A/2022/615476
Deepak Sandhu ......अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Lokpal of India, RTI Cell, 6,
Vasant Kunj, Institutional
Area, Phase-II, New Delhi-110070. .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 11/01/2023
Date of Decision : 11/01/2023
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 25/02/2022
CPIO replied on : 25/02/2022
First appeal filed on : 25/02/2022
First Appellate Authority's order : 04/03/2022
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : NIL
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 25.02.2022 seeking the following information:
1. Certified copy of name of the authority or agency or whatsoever procedure to file a COMPLAINT AGAINST THE LOKPAL INDIA.1
The CPIO furnished a reply to the appellant on 25.02.2022 stating as under:
"The Lokpal of India is functioning in terms of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013. You are requested to go through the provisions of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, available on the website of the Lokpal of India (i.e. https://lokpal.gov.in )"
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.02.2022. FAA's order dated 04.03.2022, held as under:
"The Lokpal of India is functioning in terms of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013. You are requested to go through the provisions of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, available on the website of the Lokpal of India (i.e. https://lokpal.gov.in ). And click complaint corner on the website of Lokpal of India."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, the appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not present.
Respondent: Rajesh Kumar, US & CPIO present through intra-video conference.
The CPIO reiterated the reply provided to the Appellant and submitted that the available information has been provided to him.
Decision:
The Commission based on a perusal of the facts on record observes that the reply provided by the CPIO is as per the provisions of the RTI Act leaving no scope of intervention in the matter.
The appeal is dismissed accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोज पुनहािन) हािन) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) 2 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 3