Central Information Commission
Mra D Nargolkar vs Ministry Of Defence on 26 March, 2014
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No.-326, 2nd Floor, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066.
Website : cic.gov.in
Telephone No.: +91-11-26105682
File No.CIC/LS/A/2013/001694/RM
Appellant: Col. A.D. Nargolkar, Pune
Public Authority: Hq. 41 Arty. Div. C/o 56 APO
Date of Hearing: 26.03.2014
Date of decision: 26.03.2014
Heard today, dated 26.03.2014 through video conferencing.
Appellant is present.
Public Authority absent.
FACTS
Vide RTI dt 20.3.13, appellant had sought information on 11 points relating to Court of Inquiry order against the appellant.
2. PIO HQ 41 Arty Div, vide letter dt 8.4.13, provided a point wise response.
3. An appeal was filed on 15.4.13.
4. PIO on behalf of AA returned the appeal vide letter dated 26.5.2013 as it was received unsigned. Fresh appeal was filed on 21.6.2013.
5. Submissions made by the appellant were heard. Appellant submitted that though a fresh appeal was filed by him on 21.6.2013, the FAA has not responded to his appeal till date. There is an attempt by the concerned authorities to delay the matter deliberately and his RTI has been treated in a very cavalier manner. Except for point no. 1 & 2, no information has been provided in respect of point no. 3 to 11 of his RTI. In response to a query from the Commission, appellant submitted that an inquiry was instituted against him in 2007, which was quashed by the Delhi High Court following an appeal filed by him. Subsequently, the Army authorities moved the Supreme Court which had remanded the case back to the Armed Forces Tribunal, Mumbai on 10.3.2014. In the absence of the public authority, their views could not be ascertained.
DECISION
6. The Commission in its judgement dt 26.8.11 (CIC/LS/A/2010/000685) in the case of Smt Durgesh Kumari Vs Income Tax Department has held that the process 1 of prosecution is a continuing process which can be said to be over only when all judicial remedies have been fully exhausted. In view of the above, we find the response of PIO in denying information as per Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act in order except point no.10.
7. PIO is directed to provide a copy of covering letter as sought by the appellant in point no.10 of his RTI, within two weeks from date of receipt of the order.
8. The Commission takes a serious view of the fact that the representatives of the public authority did not attend the hearing and though the fact that a fresh appeal was filed on 21.6.13, the designated FAA, Dy GOC, HQ 41 Arty Div has failed to provide a response as stipulated in the RTI Act.
The appeal is disposed of.
Sd/-
(Rajiv Mathur) Central Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy forwarded to:
The CPIO Hq 41 Arty Div PIN -908441 C/o 56 APO The Dy GOC & First Appellate Authority RTI Cell, HQ 41 Arty Div PIN -908441, C/o 56 APO Colonel A D Nargolkar E-8/12, Salunke Vihar Rode, Pune -411022.
(Raghubir Singh) Deputy Registrar .03.2014 2 3