Central Information Commission
Gita Dewan Verma vs Ministry Of Electronics & Information ... on 6 May, 2025
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MOEIT/A/2022/651979
CIC/MOEIT/A/2022/651982
Ms. Gita Dewan Verma ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, Ministry Of Electronics & Information ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Technology
Date of Hearing : 06.03.2025
Date of Decision : 11.04.2025
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
Case No. RTI Filed CPIO reply First FAO 2nd Appeal
on appeal /Complainant
received on
651979 11.06.2022 27.07.2022 27.02.2022 26.08.2022 27.09.2022
651982 05.07.2022 27.07.2022 27.02.2022 25.08.2022 27.09.2022
[Both cases originate out of the same RTI application filed by the same
Appellant, hence the cases are clubbed together for proper adjudication]
Information soughtand background of the case:
(1) CIC/MOEIT/A/2022/651979 (2) CIC/MOEIT/A/2022/651982 The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 11.06.2022 before the Cabinet Secretariat seeking information on the following points:-
1. "The record keeping and retention policies for the Notes for and other records related to Cabinet Committees.
2. The particulars (date and file number) of the communications by which the Planning Commission forwarded the Notes for: (a) the 5 meetings of CC-UIDAI for which press releases dated 18/05/10, 22/07/10, 27/01/12, 09/05/13 and 04/02/14 are found on PIB website (under Other Cabinet Committees), and (b) the Approval of Phase-V for which press release dated 10/09/14 is accessible through Cabinet Secretariat website link for CCEA press releases.
3. For all Cabinet Secretariat records related to CC-UIDAI meaningful description (e.g., by way of statement u/s 4(1)(b)(vi), detailed with the information of the cataloguing and indexing u/s 4(1)(a) and identifying for each item precisely who is to decide when to make it public)."Page 1 of 4
On 01/05.07.2022, Cabinet Secretariat transferred the points no. 2 & 3 of the RTI application dated 11.06.2022 to CPIO, MeitY and CPIO, NITI Aayog for response.
The CPIO, Ministry Of Electronics & Information Technology vide letter dated 27.07.2022 replied as under:-
"Point No. 1 to 3:- The information sought does not pertain to MeitY."
Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 27.07.2022. The FAA, MeitY disposed off the First Appeal on 25.08.2022 with the following observation:-
2. "The matter has been looked into again and informed that:
No records related to erstwhile Cabinet Committee on UIDAI are available with MeitY. UIDAI was attached with Meity w.e.f 12 th September, 2015. This was also replied by Meity in her earlier RTI request vide Regn. No. DITEC/R/E/22/00447 (copy enclosed).
Cabinet Secretariat and NITI Aayog are best placed to decide any request for information on Cabinet matter related to CC-UIDAI. The current RTI was received by Meity from Cabinet Secretariat and NITI Aayog. NITI Aagoy has already provided the information on CC-UIDAI in the matter (copy enclosed).
Meity has no information on CC-UIDAI related matters.
3. In view of the above, the appeal is disposed off."
The annexure mentioned at bullet point number 1 of the FAA's order i.e. a copy of email dated 27.05.2022 with respect to RTI request Regn. No. DITEC/R/E/22/00447 sent to the Appellant by an official from Meity is attached with the FAA's order dated 25.08.2022, whereby the CPIO/DD(eGov), Meity had informed the Appellant that: "No records related to erstwhile Cabinet Committee on UIDAI are available with MeitY. UIDAI was attached MeitY w.e.f 12 September 2015"
Likewise, response dated 15.07.2022 sent by the NITI AAYOG, whereby information record keeping and retention policy related records related to the Cabinet Committee has also been attached with the FAA's order, as mentioned in the bullet point 3 of the FAA's order.
Not satisfied with the response, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal challenging the very fact that the transfer of the case should have been rejected by MeitY on the following grounds:
" (i) It was not made in time as per the mandate u/s 6(3) for transfer to be made "in no case later than five days from the date of receipt of the application".
(ii) It did not satisfy the condition u/s 6(3)(i), i.e., of the information being held by MEITY (as CPIO's order dated 27/05/22 informing it was not was part of the request).
(iii) It did not satisfy the condition u/s 6(3)(ii), i.e., of the matter being more closely connected with MEITY (as MEITY, not being successor of Planning Commission, is not concerned with the decision that Cabinet Secretariat holds is to be made by the sponsoring Department).
She further contended inter alia that: Request u/s 6 has to be disposed of by decision u/s 7(1) that must provide either the information or a reason from u/s 8 or 9 to reject the request.
Page 2 of 4The fact that the RTI application has not reached the public authority which can provide the information is another ground behind the filing of the Second Appeal and she has also contended that: FAA's assertion that "NITI Aayog has already provided the information on CC-UIDAI" (as if NITI Aayog decision was in appeal before FAA) is FALSE Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
A combined written submission dated 21.02.2025 with respect to three Second Appeals listed today for hearing has been received from CPIO, MeitY with a copy marked to the Appellant, reiterating the aforementioned facts as under:
"2. In respect to the applicant, Ms. Gita Dewan Verma's RTI application vide Regn. No. DITEC/R/X/22/00032 dated 01.07.2022, DITEC/R/X/22/00033 dated 05.07.2022 were received from Cabinet Secretariat and DITEC/R/X/22/00035 dated 18.07.2022 received from NITI Aayog under section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005 and the CPIO, Cabinet Secretariat stating that "For information relating to Point no. 2 and Point no. 3 part of the application are transferred to CPIO, MeitY and CPIO, NITI Aayog for response as they are best placed to consider the request for information on Cabinet matters based on the position if the matter is complete or over under first proviso to Section 8(1)(i) or any other provisions of the RTI Act, 2005."
3. It is evident that the RTI Applications dated 01.07.2022, 05.07.2022, 18.07.2022 and First Appeal dated 18.07.2022 have been conjointly replied vide replies dated 27.07.2022 and 25.08.2022 respectively within the time period stipulated under the RTI Act, 2005. Furthermore, similar issues regarding RTI request Regn. No. DITEC/R/X/22/00032 have been adjudicated on 19.07.2023, before the CIC in case no. CIC/NITIA/A/2022/648143 dated 30.06.2023. The decision regarding the same is enclosed"
Written submission dated 04.03.2025, has been received from PIO, Cabinet Secretariat relevant excerpt whereof is as under:
" .....5.1 The instant Appeal pertains to the disposal/decision of the CPIO/FAA in the MeitY.
5.2 As per the Government of India (Allocation of Business) Rules, 1961, the function allocated to the Cabinet Secretariat is "Secretarial assistance to the Cabinet and Cabinet Committees". This Secretariat neither sponsors nor implements any programme and therefore cannot decide when a matter related to a cabinet decision is 'complete and over'. The timing and manner of disclosure of cabinet papers may be best decided by the Public Authority who originated the proposal.
5.3 As far as CPIO, Cabinet Secretariat is concerned, the information/reply with respect to point No. 1 of the RTI Application dated 11.06.2022 had been provided. Also, with respect to point No. 2 and 3, the application was transferred to the CPIO, MeitY and CPIO, NITI Aayog for considering the request for information on Cabinet matters.
Written submission dated 21.02.2025 has been received from the CPIO, NITI Ayog pertaining to the RTI application dated 11.06.2022, wherein the Respondent has stated that appropriate response had been sent to the Appellant vide letter dated 15.07.2022 and 18.07.2022 and the RTI application had been duly transferred to i) CPIO, State Finance & Coordination, NITI Ayog, ii) CPIO, Science & Technology, NITI Ayog, iii) UIDAI and iv) MeitY under Section 6(3) for providing information directly to Page 3 of 4 the Appellant. In so far as the appeals discussed herein are concerned, the Respondent, NITI Ayog has stated that the reply of the CPIO, First Appeal and FAA's order are not related to NITI Ayog. Moreover all necessary and existing information available with the NITI Ayog had been duly provided to the Appellant. Hence the answering respondent has sought deletion from the array of parties in these appeals. A copy of the submission has been duly marked to the Appellant.
Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.
Appellant: Present with Shri Sarbajit Roy Respondent: Shri Biswajeet Mandhata Patnaik - US/CPIO, NITI Ayog; Shri satya Prakash Chaudhary - US-Cabinet Secretariat and Smt. Srabana Ghoshal - CPIO- MeitY were present during hearing.
Parties are present for the hearing and reiterated their respective contentions as borne out of the aforementioned records.
Decision:
After examining the submissions filed by all the parties and hearing the contentions at length, it is noted that information available on record as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, have been duly furnished by the Respondents to the Appellant, which are self explanatory in nature. The appeals at hand relate to MeitY and since response given by the Respondent is well within the purview of the RTI Act, no further direction is warranted in this case.
Thus it is noted that the information held or accessible to the Respondent public authority has been duly provided to the Appellant, in consonance with the provisions of the RTI Act. Hence no further adjudication is deemed necessary in these cases, under the RTI Act.
The appeals are disposed off accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)