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 1, Cited by 1]

Central Information Commission

Mrsp Sugunavati vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited ... on 19 November, 2014

                        Central Information Commission, New Delhi
                               File No. CIC/SH/C/2014/000073
                               File No. CIC/SH/A/2014/000319
                   Right to Information Act­2005­Under Section (18) / (19)




Date of hearing                          :   19th November 2014


Date of decision                         :   19th November 2014



Name   of   the   Complainant   /        :   Ms. P Sugunavati
     Appellant                               5­35­10, 3/18 Brodipet, 
                                             Guntur ­ 522 002


Name of the Public                       :   Central Public Information Officer,
Authority/Respondent                         Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.,

Office of State Coordinator & CPIO,  Reliance Humsafar, Second Floor, 8­2­ 618/2, Road No. 11, Banjara Hills,  Hyderabad 500 034 The Complainant / Appellant was not present. She was represented by Shri G. L.  N. Prasad, who was present at the NIC Studio, Guntur.

On behalf of the Respondents, Shri Suresh Tripathi, CPIO was present at the NIC  Studio, Hyderabad.

Information Commissioner : Shri Sharat Sabharwal These two files contain a complaint and an appeal regarding the RTI applications  dated 10.10.2013 and 4.10.2013 respectively, filed by the Complainant / Appellant seeking  information on various points.   Not satisfied with the response of the Respondents, she  has approached the CIC by lodging a complaint and an appeal.  

2.  We heard the submissions of the representative of the Complainant / Appellant and  the Respondents.  The representative of the Complainant / Appellant stated that the CPIO  has   been   either   denying   information   or   providing   misleading   information.     The  Respondents   submitted   that   the   Complainant   /   Appellant   has   filed   multiple   RTI  applications   concerning   the   same   issue.     They   further   submitted   that   inspection   of  documents was also allowed in this case and it was carried out by the representative of  the Complainant / Appellant.

3. Having perused the records, we find that in her RTI application dated 10.10.2013,  the   Complainant   referred   to   the   fact   that   she   had   filed   146   RTI   applications   since  December,   2007.     We   also   note   that   the   two   RTI   applications   before   us   today   deal  essentially   with   the   same   issues   that   figured   in   the   RTI   applications   on   Files   No.  CIC/LS/C/2012/000887/SH and CIC/LS/A/2012/0001424/SH, on which a hearing was held  on 31.10.2014.  In view of the foregoing, the complaint/ appeal on the files before us today  will also be disposed of along with the order in respect of the hearing held on 31.10.2014.

4.  Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.

Sd/­ (Sharat Sabharwal) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy.  Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application  and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.

(Vijay Bhalla)       Deputy Registrar