Central Information Commission
Arani vs Geological Survey Of India on 20 April, 2017
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
Decision No. CIC/SH/C/2016/900240/SB/GSIND
Dated 19.04.2017
Complainant : Shri Arani Guha,
A.3, 206, Indu Aranya Pallavi
Apartments, Bandlaguda,
Nagole, Hyderabad-500 068 (A.P)
Respondent : Central Public Information Officer,
Geological Survey of India,
Southern Region.
Hyderabad-500068 (A.P)
Date of Hearing : 19.04.2017
Relevant dates emerging from the complaint:
RTI application : 30.04.2016
Complaint : 27.06.2016
ORDER
1. The complainant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Geological Survey of India (GSI), Southern Region, Hyderabad, seeking information on three points including, inter-alia, the action taken by the Pay and Accounts Office (PAO), State Unit Andhra Pradesh and Telangana to process the Government E-Payment Gateway (GEPG) payment for him.
2. The complainant filed a complaint before the Commission on the grounds that no reply in response to his RTI application has been received by him from the respondent.
Hearing:
3. The complainant Shri Arani Guha was not present despite notice. The respondent Shri N. Padmaiah, Director and CPIO, GSI, Hyderabad attended the hearing through video conferencing.
Page1
4. The respondent submitted that information as per available records has been provided to the complainant vide letter dated 06.06.2016. Hence, no further information remains to be provided to the complainant.
Decision:
5. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of the respondent and perusing the records, observes that due information has been provided to the complainant by the respondent. The Commission further observes that since the information sought was provided to the complainant, it cannot be said that the information was malafidely withheld by the respondent. Hence, in the absence of any malafide intention, it would not be appropriate to initiate any action for imposition of penalty on the CPIO.
6. With the above observations, the complaint is disposed of.
7. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
(Sudhir Bhargava) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (V.K. Sharma) Designated Officer Page2