Central Information Commission
Mr.Rattan Singh vs Ministry Of Information And ... on 18 April, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2012/000616/18451
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2012/000616
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Rattan Singh (Advocate),
Plot no. 9, IInd Extension,
Karan Nagar (New),
Jammu-180001.
Respondent : Public Information Officer (Advertising Wing),
Director, Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Directorate of Advertising & Visual Publicity (DAVP) , Phase IV, Soochna Bhawan, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003.
RTI application filed on : 09/07/2011 PIO replied : 19/09/2011 First appeal filed on : 23/08/2011 First Appellate Authority order : ------------- Second Appeal received on : 22/02/2012 Sl. Information Sought Reply of the PIO 1. Whether there is any change in the DAVP's declared No.
Advertisement Policy dated October 02, 2007 with regard to provisions relating to the distribution of Advertisement to Newspapers/periodicals?
2. Whether DAVP has adopted some internal criteria recently Yes. The criteria for linking the quantum/volume of advertisements with the classification/categorization of daily number of pages of individual newspaper is given in attached note. newspapers/journals/periodicals. If yes, please specify.
3. Kindly specify whether the quantum of advertisements Yes. The quantum of advertisement distributed among the publications of J&K have been issued as per the ratio given at clause 3 of maintained for the last three years as per the ratios given in New Advertisement Policy w.e.f.
clauses 3, 25, 26 of DAVP's Advertisement Policy 2007?02/10/2007 is maintained for all states, not separately for J&K.
4. The Quantum of Advertisements distributed among the List of advertisements distributed among Newspapers of Jammu & Kashmir from April 01, 2011 to the newspapers of Jammu & Kashmir June 30, 2011. from 01/04/2011 to 30/06/2011 is enclosed.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Information not provided by the PIO. Acknowledgement not sent.Page 1 of 2
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Not enclosed.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Rattan Singh on video conference from NIC-Jammu Studio; Respondent: Absent;
The information available on the records has apparently been provided to the Appellant as per his own admission. He believes that the information provided in query-2 reveals that some changes in policy are being made without giving any reasons. The Commission notes that information available on the records has been provided to the Appellant. If the Appellant has any grievances he should approach an appropriate forum. The appellant appears to be wanting some more information for which he is advised to file another RTI application.
Decision:
The Appeal is dismissed.
This decision is announced in open chamber. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 18 April 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (PG) Page 2 of 2