Central Information Commission
Shri Amarjeet Singh Chimni vs President’S Sectt on 30 November, 2009
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2008/01588 dated 9-9-2008
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant: Shri Amarjeet Singh Chimni
Respondent: President's Sectt
Decision Announced 30.11.'09
FACTS
By three applications of 16-6-07 and 3-9-07, the last two of which were received in the office of PIO, President's Secretariat on 9-6-08 Shri Amarjeet Singh Chimni of New Delhi sought the following information and information flowing therefrom:
"Q. No. 1.: What objection does Your Lordship have if I report to United Nations (U. N. O.) that police station Bilaspur District Rampur (UP) has not registered my cognizable Complaint against Sub Divisional Magistrate (SDM V. K. Singh) that Sub Divisional Magistrate (SDM V. K. Singh) broke my bone and booked me in false police case (Case No. 1359/2001, crime no. 176/2000, u/s 332/353/504/506 IPC, P. S. Bilaspur) as sub Divisional Magistrate (SDM V. K. Singh) was infuriated by my complainants of corruption.
Q. No. 2.: What objection does Your Lordship have if I report to United (UNO) that is Excellency the President of India has not taken any action to save or restore my forest in spite of countless legal notices and the law courts have done nothing to protect or restore my forest and every agency in India was approached but I failed to get help from each and every agency in India.
Q. No. 3: Will Your Lordship not help me in the matter of getting gunman because the Superintendent of Police Rampur is not replying my application for gunman (S. P. Diary No. 41 & 42 dated 10-6-2002) and Superintendent Police is not registering my FIRs in countless cognizable offences?"
In his response of 17-6-08 Shri Faiz Ahmed Kidwai, CPIO, President's Secretariat has informed the appellant as follows:
"In connection with the information asked by you, no related information is held by this Secretariat. All the queries are not related to any specific information held. You may approach the concerned offices for seeking specific information, which exists. Your RTI applications are neither as per the spirit nor covered under definition of information under section 2 (f) of the RTI Act, 1 2005 and therefore your above said RTI applications are rejected."
Shri Chimni has then moved an appeal before the Appellate Authority Ms. Rasika Chaube, IFA, President's Secretariat with the following prayer:
"1. Pray give personal hearing to appellant.
2. Pray permit appellant to transmit order to present appeal to UNO human Rights and all Human Rights in foreign countries.
3. Pray over rule/ quash/ set aside impugned order dated 17-6-2008.
4. Pray give all other appropriate relief's."
In response, by her order of 31-7-08, appellate authority Ms. Chaube has found as follows:
"This matter relates to his complaints which comes under the purview of State Government and not related to President's Secretariat. The transfer of case by CPIO to the Chief Secretary is correct. If appellant is not satisfied with the reply given by the State Government then for removal of his complaints and appropriate information he may appeal to the appellate authority of State."
Appellant Shri Amarjeet Singh Chimni's prayer before us in his second appeal is as follows:
"1. Pray overrule letter dated 31-7-2008.
2. Pray permit me to inform UNO that all remedies exhausted in India and no relief.
3. Pray give all appropriate relief's."
The appeal was heard through videoconference on 30-11-2009. The following are present at NIC Studio, President's Secretariat:
Respondents Ms. Rasika Chaube, Appellate Authority, President Sectt. Ms. Kohli, Under Secretary, representing CPIO.
Appellant Shri Amarjeet Singh Chimni appeared before us well after the hearing, but respondents still being present in connection with another hearing were heard.
DECISION NOTICE 2 It seems that the applications of Shri Chimni have taken an unduly long time from their date of despatch to appear on the table of CPIO. In case there is a defect in the receipt system of RTI applications in the President's Secretariat, CPIO, Shri F.A. Kidwai will verify the matter and rectify any shortcoming. Nevertheless, the prayer, which constitutes the basis of Shri Chimni's appeal before us, is not within the purview of the RTI Act. It is not for this Commission to advise him, as a free citizen of India, to whom he may complain. He is free to make representation to whom he wishes. There is no information that the President of India or any other official can give him in this regard. On the question of alleged excesses by the local police and SDM, both offices fall within the jurisdiction of the Govt. of UP. As already advised appellant Shri Amarjeet Singh Chimni may approach the appropriate authority falling within the Govt of UP for redress. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah) Chief Information Commissioner 30-11-2009 Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar) Joint Registrar 30-11-2009 3