Central Information Commission
Mrmanish Aggarwal vs Directorate Of Education, Gnct, Delhi on 3 August, 2015
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
(Room No.315, BWing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 110 066)
Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar)
Information Commissioner
CIC/SA/A/2015/000786
CIC/SA/A/2015/000796
CIC/SA/A/2015/000829
Manish Aggarwal Vs. Dte of Eduction(East), GNCTD
Important Dates and time taken:
CIC/SA/A/2015/000786
RTI/PIO:122/27415(74) FAA Order: 2252015 Second appeal: 262015
Rejected Hearing:30072015 Decision: 03082015
CIC/SA/A/2015/000796
RTI Application: 1222015 FAA Order: 2252015 Second appeal: 262015
Rejected Hearing:30072015 Decision: 03082015
CIC/SA/A/2015/000829
RTI/PIO:122/27415(74) FAA Order: 2252015 Second appeal: 262015
Rejected Hearing:30072015 Decision: 03082015
Parties Present:
The appellant is not present. The Public Authority is represented by Ms. Neha Shankar,
Superintendent(RTI). The appellant has filed the above 3 appeals against the same Public
Authority and hence they are taken up together for hearing today.
Facts:
CIC/SA/A/2015/000786 CIC/SA/A/2015/000796 CIC/SA/A/2015/000829 CIC/SA/A/2015/000786 & 000796 & 000829 Page 1
2. The Appellant by his RTI application had sought information regarding granting of prosecution sanction against Smt. Saroj Bala Sain and Shri Udhav Singh. Pursuant to which he was informed by letter dated 02.02.2015 that his request for granting of prosecution has been disposed off. He wanted to know the name and designation of persons concerned who is the sanctioning authority, whether any order or comments were prepared by Lt. Governor of Delhi on his representation etc. Claiming nonfurnishing of information within the prescribed period, appellant filed first appeal on 22.04.2015. PIO, thereafter, replied on 27.04.2015, wherein for point for no. 1,2&4, he stated that the information was not available in the office and for point n. 3 stated that the file has been forwarded to HQ for necessary action. FAA by his order dated 22.05.2015 disposed of the appeal stating that the reply had been already furnished to the appellant. However, PIO is directed to provide the dispatch number and date of forwarding file to HQ at the request of appellant. Being unsatisfied with the order of FAA, appellant approached the Commission in second appeal. DECISION:
CIC/SA/A/2015/000786 CIC/SA/A/2015/000796 CIC/SA/A/2015/000829
3. The appellant is not present. The Public Authority made their submissions. The respondent officer submitted that this case was already heard on 1572015 and rejected by the Commission vide file No.CIC/SA/A/2015/000772 dated 1772015. In view of this, as the three RTI applications of the appellant are repetition of the same, the Commission rejects the above three appeals.
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (Babu Lal) CIC/SA/A/2015/000786 & 000796 & 000829 Page 2 Deputy Registrar.
Address of the parties :
1. The PIO under RTI Act, Govt. of Delhi Directorate of Education (East), DBlock, Anand Vihar, Delhi110092 (RTI Cell)
2. Shri Manish Aggarwal A102, First Floor, Yojana Vihar Delhi110092 CIC/SA/A/2015/000786 & 000796 & 000829 Page 3