Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Mukesh Kumar Sharma vs Delhi Transport Corporation on 7 August, 2023

Author: Uday Mahurkar

Bench: Uday Mahurkar

                                       के न्द्रीयसच
                                                  ू नाआयोग
                             Central Information Commission
                                     बाबागंगनाथमागग,मुननरका
                             Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                               नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

द्वितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/DTCOR/A/2022/154528-UM

Mr.MUKESH KUMAR SHARMA

                                                                         ....अपीलकताा/Appellant
                                            VERSUS
                                              बनाम

CPIO,
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
DY.C.G.M.(Tr.)/ & (PIO H.Q.), RTI CELL,
GNCTD, SCINDIA HOUSE, CONNOUGHT PLACE
NEW DELHI-110001
                                                                     ..... प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing      :              02.08.2023
Date of Decision     :              07.08.2023

Date of RTI application                                                05.09.2022
CPIO's response                                                        14.10.2022
Date of the First Appeal                                               07.10.2022
First Appellate Authority's response                                   Not on record
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission                   22.11.2022

                                           ORDER

FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information, as under:-

The Manager (PLD) vide letter dated 14.10.2022 furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant approached the FAA.The order of the FAA, if any, is not on the record of the Commission.

Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: Present in person Respondent: Mr Prashant Kumar manager, Mr Yogesh Kumar PIO HQ, Present in person The Appellant while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application submitted that partial information has been furnished to him. The Respondent in reply submitted that the documents contain third party information, hence cannot be furnished.

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission directs the CPIO to re- examine the RTI Application and furnish suitable information to the Appellant, completely redacting the third party details, in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 21 days from the receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.

The Appeal stands disposed accordingly.

(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर) ू ना आयुक्त) (Information Commissioner) (सच Authenticated true copy (अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 07.08.2023 Page 2 of 2