Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Dhyan Chand vs Delhi Jal Board on 31 July, 2023

Author: Uday Mahurkar

Bench: Uday Mahurkar

                                      के न्द्रीय सच
                                                  ू ना आयोग
                          Central Information Commission
                                   बाबा गगं नाथ मागग, मुननरका
                           Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                            नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

द्वितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/DELJB/A/2022/665729 -UM

Mr. DHYAN CHAND
                                                                        ....अपीलकताा/Appellant



                                         VERSUS
                                           बनाम



CPIO,
DELHI JAL BOARD, SECRETARY &
PIO/NODAL OFFICER, RTI CELL,
ROOM NO.-305, GNCTD, HQ,
VARUNALAYA PHASE-2, KAROL
BAGH, NEW DELHI-110005



                                                                   ....प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing     :             26.07.2023
Date of Decision    :             28.07.2023



Date of RTI application                                                 02-08-2022
CPIO's response                                                         05-08-2022
Date of the First Appeal                                                21-08-2022
First Appellate Authority's response                                    Not on record
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission                    NIL

                                        ORDER

FACTS The Appellant vide his RTI application sought information on following points:

The CPIO vide letter dated 05-08-2022, furnished a reply to the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, 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: The appellant attended the hearing in person. Respondent: The respondent Mohd. Idris Ali, EE, DJB attended the hearing in person.

The Appellant reiterated the contents of the RTI application and submitted that no response was furnished to him by the CPIO. The Respondent present during the hearing submitted that a suitable response in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, had already been furnished to the Appellant.

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both parties and after perusal of the documents available on record, the Commission directs the CPIO to offer an inspection to the Appellant of the Records/ Documents pertaining to the RTI Application at a mutually convenient date and time and provide point-wise information within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The Commission also directs the Respondent to depute a responsible officer to assist the Appellant during the inspection and facilitate the inspection of complete files and provide certified copies of selected documents by the Appellant, up to 50 pages, free of cost.

The Commission cautions the Respondent to be more careful in the future while dealing with the RTI application so that no such lapse would recur and the provisions of the RTI Act are complied with in letter and spirit.

The Appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

                                                           (Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर)
                                               (Information Commissioner) (सच        ु )
                                                                            ू ना आयक्त
Authenticated true copy

(अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पजं ीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 28.07.2023 GS Page 3 of 3