Central Information Commission
Padmavathy N vs Ut Of Puducherry on 27 February, 2025
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/UTPON/C/2023/651364
Padmavathy N ....निकायतकताग /Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
PIO,
Commissioner, Municipal
Committee, Mahe,
Puducherry - 643310 ....प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 19.02.2025
Date of Decision : 25.02.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 05.09.2023
PIO replied on : 12.10.2023
First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 07.11.2023
Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 05.09.2023 (offline) seeking the following information:
"1. It is requested you to provide the copy of the application and other required documents submitted for opening a fish/vegetable/ chicken shop at Makkuni to your office by the dealer of the fish shop Makkuni Fish Market.Page 1 of 4
2. It is also requested you to provide the copy of the license given by the concerned authority to the licensee for opening the fish shop Makkuni Fish Market.
3. It is also requested you to mention the relevant acts applicable to give license for opening a fish shop.
4. Is it required to obtain consents from the people staying in the nearby areas for opening a fish shop? If the answer is yes, please provide the copies of the consents obtained from the people staying near to Makkuni Fish Market.
5. Have you received any complaints against Makkuni Fish Market for dumping the fish wastes in the nearby areas? If the answer is yes, please provide the copy of the complaints received in this regard.
6. Have Government authorities conducted any inspection at Makkuni Fish Market on 15/08/2023? If the answer is yes, please furnish the copy of the inspection report submitted in this regard.
7. It is also requested you to furnish all the documents in connection with the proceedings and actions taken in the complaint against the fish shop Makkuni Fish Market."
The PIO furnished a point-wise reply to the complainant on 12.10.2023 stating as under:
"1, 2 & 4. Copy of the application and license may be received on payment of ₹10/- (22/- per page).
3. Puducherry Municipalities Act.
5. Yes
6. Yes, The Commissioner, Mahe Municipality inspected the place of business and the surroundings on 15.08.2023 nothing adverse was noticed. However, the Manager was directed to keep the premises clean and their activities in the licenced premises should not cause any inconvenience to the neighbors.
7. A warning Notice was issued on 01.09.2023." Page 2 of 4
Being dissatisfied, the complainant failed to file a First Appeal. The FAA order is not on record.
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Complainant: Absent Respondent: Absent Both the parties remained absent despite the notices.
Decision The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, and perusal of the records, noted that point-wise reply was given to the complainant vide letter dated 12.10.2023. The reply given by the respondent appears to be appropriate.
It is pertinent to mention that both the parties were not present to press their side of the arguments despite hearing notices served to them. The reasons for the complainant's dissatisfaction could not be ascertained as she did not appear before the Commission.
It is noted that the instant matter is a complaint filed under Section 18 of the RTI Act. Hence, the only adjudication required to be made by the Commission is to determine if the information has been denied with a mala fide intention or unreasonable cause to the information seeker. Perusal of the records reveals that there is no mala fide on part of the respondent CPIO in replying to the RTI application. Hence, the Commission finds no scope of intervention in the instant complaint.
Notwithstanding the aforesaid, the Commission admonishes the conduct of PIO for not appearing before the Commission despite notice. Such an act of the CPIO only shows his/her casual approach towards the RTI Act and disregards the proceedings of the Commission. Hence, PIO is cautioned to be careful in future and appear before the respective bench failing which penal action may be taken against him/her as per the provisions of RTI Act.Page 3 of 4
The Complaint is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार वििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानित प्रनत) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)