Central Information Commission
Sayida Begum vs Ministry Of External Affairs on 22 October, 2019
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या /Second Appeal No. CIC/MOEAF/A/2018/127093
Sayida Begum ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
1. CPIO, Ministry of External, ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Affairs, Akbar Bhawan,
Chanakya Puri, New Delhi.
2. CPIO, Under Secretary,
Ministry of External Affairs,
Jawahar Lal Nehru Bhawan,
New Delhi
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 04.12.2017 FA : 17.02.2018 SA : 28.05.2018
CPIO : not on record FAO : not on record Hearing : 18.10.2019
ORDER
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Overseas Employment Division of Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), New Delhi seeking information on four points pertaining to her complaint, including, inter- alia, (i) whether POE officer, Mumbai can resolve a complaint unilaterally Page 1 of 4 without consent of the complainant, (ii) reasons reduced in writing for disposal of the complaint by POE and (ii) name and designation of officer with whom complaint was pending during pendency and action taken by each officer along with their remarks and date of receipt and transfer of complaint.
2. The appellant filed an appeal before the Commission on the grounds that the CPIO did not provide any reply, and the FAA also did not adjudicate her appeal, and hence no reply/information was furnished to her. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide the information sought by her, impose penalty on the CPIO and to provide compensation to her.
Hearing:
3. The appellant was not present despite notice. The respondent Shri Jagdish Kumar, POE, Protector of Emigrant-II, Ministry of External Affairs, attended the hearing through video conferencing.
4. The respondent admitted that due to oversight, inadvertently no reply in response to the appellant's RTI application/first appeal could be provided to her. The respondent tendered his unconditional apology for this lapse and requested the Commission to condone the same. The respondent, however, affirmed that the appellant was advised by the PoE about her matter in January, 2018 Decision:
5. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of the respondent and perusing the records, notes that no reply in response to the RTI application was furnished to the appellant by the respondent. The Commission takes a serious note of this lapse and counsels the CPIO to be more careful in future so that such lapses do not recur. The Commission also directs the respondent to provide Page 2 of 4 complete and correct information to the appellant within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order under intimation to the Commission.
6. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
7. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
Sudhir Bhargava (सुधीर भागव)व) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) दनांक / Date 21.10.2019 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) S. S. Rohilla (एस. एस. रोिह ला) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 / [email protected] Addresses of the parties:
1. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) Ministry of External Affairs Akbar Bhawan, Chanakya Puri, New Delhi 110021.
2. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Ministry of External Affairs Akbar Bhawan, Chanakya Puri, New Delhi 110021.
3. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) Ministry of External Affairs, Jawahar Lal Nehru Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi-110011.Page 3 of 4
4. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Under Secretary (RTI), Ministry of External Affairs, Room No. 1024, Jawahar Lal Nehru Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi-110011.
5. Smt. Sayida Begum Page 4 of 4