Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Anil Kumar Shukla vs Ordnance Factory Board on 16 April, 2026

                                     केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                              Central Information Commission
                                   बाबा गंगनाथ मागग,मुननरका
                               Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                                नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/OFBKO/A/2024/135569

Anil Kumar Shukla                                               ... अपीलकताग/Appellant

                                     VERSUS
                                      बनाम

CPIO: Ordnance Equipment
Factory: Kanpur                                             ...प्रनतवािीगण/Respondents

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 04.07.2024               FA    : 16.08.2024               SA     : 28.10.2024

CPIO : 02.08.2024              FAO : 23.08.2024                 Hearing : 25.03.2026


Date of Decision: 15.04.2026
                                         CORAM:
                                   Hon'ble Commissioner
                                 _ANANDI RAMALINGAM
                                        ORDER

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 04.07.2024 seeking information on the following points:

➢ प्राथी को कृष्णा इण्टर प्राइजेज 262 सी ब्लाक पनकी कानपुर -20 के बारे में जानकारी चानिए जो ननम्न िै ।
1. P/O No. 20170774/PV/LP/GFR DATED 13/02/2018 के अन्तगगत फमग ने आपकी ननमाग णी में कुल नकतना कायग नकया और उसका नकतना भुगतान िोता िै । कृपया जानकारी िे ने की कृपा करें ।
CIC/OFBKO/A/2024/135569 Page 1 of 5
2. P/O No. 20170774/PV/LP/GFR DATED 13/02/2018 के अन्तगगत ननमाग णी ने कुल नकतना भुगतान नकया िै । उसका नलखित अथवा छायाप्रपत्र िे ने की कृपा करें ।
3. P/O No. 20170774/PV/LP/GFR DATED 13/02/2018 के अन्तगगत ननमागणी को अभी नकतना भुगतान िे ना लंनबत िै ? उसकी जानकारी व छाया प्रपत्र के माध्यम से िे ने की कृपा करें ।
4. P/O No. 20170774/PV/LP/GFR DATED 13/02/2018 के अन्तगगत ननमाग णी ने फमग से धरोिर रानि के नलए कुल नकतने मूल्य/कीमत की धरोिर रानि जमा करायी। कृपया जानकारी िे ने की कृपा करें व छायाप्रनत प्रपत्र प्रेनित कराने की कृपा करें ।
5. P/O No. 20170774/PV/LP/GFR DATED 13/02/2018 कुल नकतने मूल्य का था? उस मूल्य के अन्तगगत धरोिर रानि आर्डीनेन्स फैक्ट्र ी बोर्डग के ननयमानुसार क्या मानक िै ?

अथवा P/O के कुल कीमत के नलए नकतनी रानि के उपरान्त धरोिर रानि की आवश्यकता िोती िै । कृपया नलखित व प्रपत्र के माध्यम से जानकारी िे ने की कृपा करें ।

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 02.08.2024 and the same is reproduced as under :-

"नबन्िु संख्या- 1. फमग में0 कृष्णा इं टर प्राइजेज को सप्लाई ऑर्डग र सं - 20170774/PV/LP/GFR निनां क 13-02-2018 जारी नकया गया था नजसका फमग िारा संपूणग कायग कर नलया गया िै ।
नबन्िु संख्या- 2 सप्लाई ऑर्डग र सं0- 20170774/PV/LP/GFR निनांक 13-02-2018 के अंतगगत फैक्ट्र ी िारा फमग को रु0 220122.00 का ऑर्डग र प्रेनित नकया गया था और फैक्ट्र ी िारा फमग को रु0 219854.78 का भुगतान नकया जा चुका िै । नबन्िु संख्या- 3 फमग मे कृष्णा इं टर प्राइजेज िारा अपनी धरोिर रानि फैक्ट्र ी से बंधन मुक्त (ररलीज) कराते समय यि इं नगत नकया था नक सप्लाई ऑर्डग र सं0- 20170774/PV/LP/GFR निनां क 13-02-2018 के माध्यम से फमग ने सप्लाई ऑर्डग र की CIC/OFBKO/A/2024/135569 Page 2 of 5 कुल कीमत का कायग समयावनध के अंतगगत पूणग कर निया था नजसका संपूणग भुगतान भी फमग को िो गया िै ।
नबन्िु संख्या- 4 सप्लाई आार्डग र सं0- 20170774/PV/LP/GFR निनां क 13-02-2018 के अंतगगत फमग िारा धरोिर रानि के रूप में रु0 22012.00 मूल्य की बैंक गारं टी जमा करवायी गयी थी।
नबन्िु संख्या- 5 सप्लाई ऑर्डग र सं0- 20170774/PV/LP/GFR निनां क 13-02-2018 कुल रु0 209640.00+10482=रु0 220122.00 (रु0.10482/- 5% टै क्स) था। ओ.एफ.बी. कोलकाता के 2010 के मैनुवल के पैरा 7.7.1 के अनुसार सप्लायर को ऑर्डग र (कां टरैक्ट्) के कुल कीमत का 10 प्रनतित धरोिर रानि के रूप में जमा नकया जाना था।"

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 16.08.2024 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 23.08.2024 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 28.10.2024.

Hearing Proceedings & Decision:

5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Arpit Singh, Senior Manager, attended the hearing through video conference.

6. The appellant inter alia submitted that the respondent had declined his request for information without valid justification. When queried regarding what information and against which point of his RTI application he is yet to get the information, the appellant insisted that the copies of payments made in relation to repair works carried out by the firm, as referred to in the RTI application, are not provided.

7. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the appellant was not the proprietor of the averred firm that carried out the repair works and did not CIC/OFBKO/A/2024/135569 Page 3 of 5 have any relation to the payments made thereof, hence, third-party information i.e. copies of transactions made by the firm, was not disclosed to him. However, the total amount which had been settled with the firm was disclosed to the appellant. Moreover, the appellant's request for payments receipts, etc. was not part of the original RTI application. The CPIO's latest written submissions dated 16.03.2026 reiterating their initial reply are taken on record.

8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that factual replies have been provided to the appellant and are found to be appropriate as per the provisions of the RTI Act. Perusal of the RTI queries make it clear that the same are unspecific wherein the appellant has repeatedly referred to information or copies related to that, without clearly seeking any particular record. Besides, the CPIO has provided details about the total amount of payments made as well as security deposit amount paid by a firm to which the appellant has no nexus. That being so, there appears to be no scope of relief in the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामल ंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) निनां क/Date: 15.04.2026 Authenticated true copy O. P. Pokhriyal (ओ.पी. पोिररयाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 CIC/OFBKO/A/2024/135569 Page 4 of 5 Addresses of the parties:

1. The CPIO, Office of the Public Information Officer, Ordnance Equipment Factory: Kanpur, Phool Bagh, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh - 208001
2. Anil Kumar Shukla CIC/OFBKO/A/2024/135569 Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)