Central Information Commission
R Viswanathan vs Ministry Of Defence on 17 June, 2022
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
Bench: Vanaja N Sarna
क य सच ु ना आयोग
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
बाबा गंगनाथ माग
Baba Gangnath Marg
मु नरका, नई द ल - 110067
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
File no.: CIC/DODEF/A/2022/121008
In the matter of:
R Viswanathan
... Appellant
VS
Central Public Information Officer
Ministry Of Defence (Army) RTI Cell,
Addl. DG AE, G-6, D-1 Wing, Sena Bhawan,
Gate No.4, IHQ of Mod (Army),
New Delhi-110011
...Respondent
RTI application filed on : 06/10/2021 CPIO replied on : 22/11/2021 First appeal filed on : 12/01/2022
First Appellate Authority order : 15/03/2022 Second Appeal dated : 23/04/2022 Date of Hearing : 16/06/2022 Date of Decision : 16/06/2022
Note: Appellant being Sr. Citizen has been allowed early hearing of his second appeal on his request.
The following were present:
Appellant: Present over VC Respondent: Lt. Col Amit Chaudhary, CPIO and Lt Col Pradeep Sehrawat, Custodian, present over VC Information Sought:
The appellant has sought the following information:
- Provide the copy of order giving criteria of awarding PASCHIM STAR Medal for 1971 war. Which area of J.K qualified the people for PASCHIM STAR?1
Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information. Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing: The appellant submitted that he is not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO. The CPIO submitted that he had provided a reply on 22.11.2021 and informed that no documents were traceable. However, the deemed CPIO submitted that additional information i.e regulations showing eligibility criteria is available. Observations:
Based on a perusal of the record, it was noted that the CPIO vide letter dated 22.11.2021 replied to the appellant that concerted efforts were made to obtain the information sought by the appellant; the same is not available/held with the concerned agency of the Headquarters. The FAA also vide order dated 15.03.2022 disposed of the first appeal and concurred with the CPIO's reply.
The CPIO vide written submissions dated 09.06.2022 submitted that the applicant has been filing RTIs on similar subjects including ACRs/Part II orders/ Duty Officer Roaster/Posting order copy/Unit War Diary of the same time period (1969 to 1972) when he was posted at 19 Division. Be that as it may, the appellant was asked to explain why he is challenging the unavailability of the information, to which he submitted that when the Indian Navy has the information therefore information being not available with the Army is not acceptable.
The Commission observed that the availability of the information was disputed by the appellant but he could not submit any record to substantiate the availability nor was able to produce any of his own records to prove his participation and presence in the referred war. Decision:
In view of the above observations, the Commission could not find any scope for providing any relief to the appellant.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आयु त) 2 Authenticated true copy (अ भ मा णत स या पत त) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182594 / दनांक/ Date 3