Central Information Commission
Sundaresan vs Comptroller & Auditor General on 29 February, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग ,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/CAGIN/A/2022/659233 +
CIC/CAGIN/A/2022/660114
Sunderasan ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO:
1. The Comptroller &
Auditor General of India, New Delhi
2. The Principal Director of Audit,
New Delhi ... ितवादीगण/Respondent(s)
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 24.07.2022 FA : 05.09.2022 &
SA : Nil
09.09.2022 11.10.2022
CPIO : Not on record & FAO : 12.09.2022 &
Hearing : 21.02.2024
03.10.2022 14.10.2022
Note: The above referred matter(s) have been clubbed for decision as these relate to
the same subject matter.
Date of Decision: 28.02.2024
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
Second Appeal No. CIC/CAGIN/A/2022/659233
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 24.07.2022 seeking information through various points in the following manner:
Page 1 of 151. "The President of India owns almost 100 % shares of the company - who was authorised to attend the AGMs and adjourned AGMS of NERAMAC for 1988-89, 1989-90, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-
19, 2019-20, 2020-21 -names , designations and official addresses and the AGMs / adjourned AGMs for which he was appointed
2. Who were at the relevant points of time when the AGM/ Adjourned AGMs were held shareholders of the company, names and designations and addresses?
3. Was the authority for each said AGM for each said year granted to the said representative of President to attend and vote in a particular manner as explained below or the authorised representative merely authorised to vote at his discretion or were some instructions given to him?
4. Did they said authorised representatives or said members, or their proxies attend the following AGMs or adjourned AGMs whose agenda included approval of account, audit reports, CAG reports, Board Reports ;( names, designations, official addresses) - and those who voted in favour and those voted against and those abstained.
1988-89, 1989-90, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017- 18, 2018-19, 2019-2, 2020-21
5. Were the account, audit reports, CAG reports, Board Reports etc approved at the said AGMs / adjourned AGMs (pls state for each such year as stated at para 1.4) etc."
1.1 Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 05.09.2022. The FAA replied to the Appellant vide order dated 12.09.2022 stating as under:
"Your RTI Appeal has been transferred to O/o PDA (AFWR) Delhi under information to you vide this office letter no. 2473 -RTI/1771-2022 dt: 5.9.22."Page 2 of 15
1.2 Subsequently, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil stating as under:
"The following multiple applications on evidencing perpetrators of fraud and other details where fraud and conspiracies were evidenced by me between CAG , fraudsters , auditors ,audit committee etc etc CAGIN/R/E/22/01532 CAGIN/A/E/22/00258 MOCAF/R/E/22/00581MOCAF/A/E/22/00051NRAMC/R/E/22/00001NRAMC/A/E/22/00 001NRAMC/R/E/22/00002NRAMC/A/E/22/00002CVCOM/R/E/22/00430CVCOM/A/E/22 /00107NRAMC/R/T/22/00001NRAMC/A/E/22/00004NRAMC/R/T/22/00002NRAMC/A/E/ 22/00005 NRAMC/R/T/22/00003 NRAMC/A/E/22/00006
3) Earlier orders with respect to information sought on annual reports to parliament includeCIC/MOCAF/A/2020/667415,CIC/MOCAF/A/2020/667423,CIC/MOCAF/C/2020 /668126 CIC/DOHIN/A/2020/667645, CIC/MOSTL/A/2020/668450, CIC-power-A-2020-
667698, DONER/R/2017/500012, DONER/R/2017/500017, DONER/R/2017/500018, DONER/R/2017/500019, CIC/NRAMC/C/2020/667816, CIC/NRAMC/C/2020/667815, CIC/NRAMC/C/2020/667787, CIC/N RAMC/C/2020/667744, CIC-DOHIN-A-2020- 668787, CIC-DOHIN-A-2020-668792, CIC-MOSTL-A2020-668832, CIC-MOSTL-A- 2020-668837, CIC-MOSTL-A-2020-668840, CIC-MOSTL-A-2020-668452, CIC- NMDCL-A-2020-668848, CIC-KIOCL-A-2020-668858, CIC-MECON-A-2020-668851, CIC-MOCAF-A-2020-667415, CIC-MOCAF-A-2020-667418, CIC-RBIND-A-2020- 667443 ( RBIND includes DHFL , ILFS fraud and annual report from DOFSR ie DOFSR- R-2019-51463 ) wilfully denied information .
4) The said annual reports to Parliament must report on fraud and conspiracies between CAG, fraudsters, auditors, audit committee etc etc
5) In CIC/MOCAF/A/2017/606909, CIC/MOCAF/A/2018/622124 the matters pertain to fraud etc and they have been flouted
6) Complaint 1/2022 has been posted to Lokpal in the matter of the following fraud among others;
• Fraud in accounts of 2012-13 and 2013-14 NERAMAC • Fraud in audit report of 2012-13 and 2013-14 NERAMAC Page 3 of 15 • Fraud in CAGs report of 2012-13 and 2013-14 NERAMAC • Fraud in Board report of 2012-13 and 2013-14 NERAMAC • Fraud of issuing AGM Notice for AGMs of 2012-13 and 2013-14 to perpetrate fraud at AGM • Etc etc
7) Similar complaints are in the pipeline for 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2018-18 etc NERAMAC
8) Of course fraud has been perpetrated at the ASMs for 2012-13, 2013-14 etc of NERAMAC
9) Fraud is definitely perpetrated at AGM eg where fraud vitiated accounts are approved at AGM more particularly where those who vote in favour of approval of such accounts knew of the fraud beforehand.
10) NERAMAC is 100 % owned by Union of India/ President of India. The shareholders include President of India and 1 or 2 shareholders holding one share each to meet the statutory requirements.
11) On behalf of the President DONER /MDONER appoints authorised representatives to attend the AGMS of NERAMAC. The names of the representatives and other details were asked.
12) The names of the persons who appointed the authorised representatives were also asked. Several other details required to make a complaint to Lokpal on AGM fraud were asked.
13) Some of the information sought are available with NERAMAC and some with DONER
14) Anticipating that NERAMAC and MDONER will harbour the delinquents, applications were made to CAG, Ministry Corporate Affairs etc etc
15) This application was also made to CAG, Ministry Corporate Affairs etc. for the following n reasons; • since the CAG can gather the information from both MDONER and NERAMAC • the Ministry should have gathered this information if it had obeyed the orders in CIC/MOCAF/A/2017/606909, CIC/MOCAF/A/2018/622124 • CVC would have the information if it had acted Page 4 of 15 lawfully on complaint no. 113511/2018/vigilance-7complaint no. 113510/2018/vigilance-7 complaint no. 113508/2018/vigilance-7
16) Even if they did not have the information they can gather the information in obedience with the said laws and orders
17) The provisions of Sec 2(f) and 2(j) and other remaining provisions of RTIA may be seen.
18) CAG may gather the information as the names of those who perpetrated the AGM frauds are required.
19) The information sought is at paras 1.1 to 1.11 of Annexure 1 to the annexure to the application and at paras 5.1 to 5.16 of Annexure 2 to the said annexure.
20) The same modus operandi and same strategy has been employed in case of DHFL, ILFS fraud etc etc and SFIO has reported to me that it is looking into the matter. On receipt of the information, complaint will be made to Lokpal and also intimated to SFIO to offer it guidelines on how to proceed in the matter.
21) I am not bound to furnish evidence of the fraud in this second appeal - however the attachment may pls be seen for some evidence of some fraud for some years and the same fraud continues."
Second Appeal No. CIC/CAGIN/A/2022/660114
2. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.09.2022 seeking for information through various pages in the following manner:
"3.1 Is there any record available and with whom of the details of all govt companies in which the central govt owns shares ---- companies in which the central govt owns 51 % or more are to be excluded from the list -- list of companies where central govt owns 51 % shares or more is required in addition . Query No 1 - action CPIOs LSS, RSS, MCA, DPE, CAG, others 3.2 Rajya Sabha Lok Sabha Ministry Corporate Affairs DPE must have these as they are concerned with ensuring that statutory details are placed before Parliament and with Page 5 of 15 implementation of Companies Act 1956 and 2013 etc. The DPE is also similarly responsible for CPSUs.
3.3 List of such companies as on 1.10.1959, 1.10.1979, 1.10.1990, and as on date may please be provided. For this purpose the appropriate portions of this application(s) may be forwarded to the concerned Ministries / Departments if required --- 2 lists are required for each year eg one of govt companies where the central govt owns shares less than 51 % and another of the govt companies where the central govt holds shares equal to or more than 51 % Query no 2 - action CPIOs LSS, RSS, MCA, DPE, CAG, others 3.4 See para 7 to end of this letter for further queries..."
2.1 The CPIO replied vide letter dated 03.10.2022 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"The sought information is not available with the public authority. However, your RTI application has been transferred to O/o the PDA (Agriculture, Food & Water Resources), New Delhi along with a copy endorsed by you vide the office letter no. 2570- RTI/2259-2022 dated 12.09.2022."
2.2 Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 11.10.2022. The FAA replied to the Appellant vide order dated 14.10.2022 stating as under:
"Your appeal has been transferred to Office of the Principal Director of Audit (Agriculture, Food & Water Resources); New Delhi vide this office letter No. 2842- RTI/2259-2022 dated 11.10.2022 under information to you vide letter No. 2843-RTI/2259- 2022 dated 11.10.2022."
2.3 Subsequently, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil stating as under:
"Preamble para 0; Information sought in DONER/R/2017/50012, DONER/R/2017/50017, DONER/R/2017/50018, DONER/R/2017/50019 was first transferred to unrelated CPIOs where AGM fraud etc was perpetrated.Page 6 of 15
• Preamble para 1 Similar information was subsequently sought in CIC-CAGIN-A- 2020- 667307 after information in DOHIN-R-2018-50110 DONER-R-2018-50044 DONER-R-2018- 50046 DPENT-R-2018-50450 MCOAL-R-2018-50219 MOCAF-R2018- 50610 MOPNG-R-2018-50514 MOSTL-R-2018-50072 POWER-R-2018-50608 CAGIN- R-2018-51594 RSECT-R-2018-50429 LOKSS-R-2018-50612 not received on annual reports to parliament under Sec 619A/394 Companies acts 1956/2013 .
• Preamble para 2 :Importance of the said annual return under said Sec 619A/394 was noted after evidencing that CAG consistently conspires with fraudsters , auditors , public servants , regulators etc • Preamble para 3 ; after noting vitiated orders in vitiated orders ; include CIC/MOCAF/A/2020/667415,CIC/MOCAF/A/2020/667423,CIC/DOHIN/A/2020/667645 , CIC/MOSTL/A/2020/668450, CIC-MOSTL-A-2020- 668832, CIC-MOSTL-A-2020- 668837, CIC-MOSTL-A-2020-668840, CIC-MOSTL-A-2020-668452, CICNMDCL-A- 2020-668848, CIC-KIOCL-A-2020-668858, CIC-MECON-A-2020-668851, CIC/LOKSS/A/2020/667249, CIC/PAROI/A/2020/667253, CIC/PAROI/A/2020/667276 • Preamble para 4: pursuant to orders in CIC-CAGIN-A-2020-667307. CAG transferred off line the application for information on annual reports and off line transfers to LOKSS , RSECT , MOCAF by CAG have not and are not responded by transferee CPIOs • Preamble para 5 - then I made applications LOKSS/R/E/22/00466 , RSECT-R-E-22- 00256 , MOCAF-R-E-22-00689 , • Preamble para 6 - LOKSS in addition to responding unsatisfactorily and misleadingly transferred the matter to CAGIN/R/X/22/00021 the original transferor and also MOCAF/R/X/22/00046 and DONER/R/X/22/00015 (to whom CAG had already transferred ) • Preamble para 7; logic in LOKSS transferring the matter back to transferor CAG is not understood • Preamble para 8; earlier the CPIO LOKSS has not furnished information and he was aided by vitiated orders in CIC/LOKSS/A/2020/667249 • Preamble para 9: information still not received Page 7 of 15 • Preamble para 10; of all the orders passed by several Presiding Officers only the orders in CIC-power-A-2020-667698 were lawful • Preamble para 11; MOCAF/R/X/22/00046 transferred to MOCAF/R/X/22/00046/1 who now says the information is to be compiled - after wasting so much time and vitiated proceedings from 2018 till 2022 . The CPIO in MOCAF/R/X/22/00046/1 so responded on 9.9.2022 after I had proclaimed that my complaints to Lokpal are getting delayed due to my corona infection • Preamble para 12 : CAG fraudsters public servants auditors etc all know that said sec 619A/394 are flouted since 1956 and thus conspire year after year in fraud since 1988 • Preamble para 13; complaint 1/2022 to Lokpal posted on 3.11.2022 • Preamble para 14; the following may be noted;
o The legislature enacts laws and for enacting laws we elect Lok Sabha members o The law requires executive to furnish annual report to Parliament o The executive does not furnish the same since 1956 o The legislature fails to follow up the same o The CAG fails to report this to the legislature o All of executive and CAG known that the law is flouted o CAG, fraudsters, auditors, public servants etc conspire to perpetrate fraud on people of India and they do for decades o No action taken by anyone o Fraudsters note the same and copy modus operandi in DHFL, ILFS fraud with auditors and secretarial auditors etc conspiring o No action taken against these auditors and secretarial auditors o all public authorities perpetrate fraud in judicial proceedings under RTIA and do not admit that the said Sec 619A/394 are flouted o it is the duty of Ministry Corporate Affairs to implement Companies Acts o Ministry Corporate Affairs is the regulator of ICAI , ICSI etc etc o orders by presiding officers except in CIC-power-A-2020-667698 prevent me from gathering evidence that the laws of accountability are flouted o the fact that laws of accountability ie Sec 619A/394 are flouted must be reported in annual report under Sec 461 (but this is not the subject matter of this second appeal) Page 8 of 15 o the annual report under Sec 619A/394 must report on fraud in accounts, audit report and why inspite of this fraud they are approved at AGM See Preamble 4 to 6 above after the track record in failure to elicit the information from 2018 from DPENT, MOCAF, CAG, LOKSS, RSECT etc etc
2) The application made to CAG culminating in almost all of CIC-CAGIN-A-2020-
667307 was resorted after CPIOs in DOHIN-R-2018-50110 DONER-R-2018-50044 DONER-R-2018- 50046 DPENT-R-2018-50450 MCOAL-R-2018-50219 MOCAF-R- 2018-50610 MOPNG-R-2018-50514 MOSTL-R-2018-50072 POWER-R-2018-50608 CAGIN-R-2018-51594 RSECT-R-2018-50429 LOKSS-R-2018-50612 started transferring applications to unrelated organisations.
3) Even after CIC-CAGIN-A-2020-667307 was transferred one of the transferees transferred the same back to CAG.
4) Still the information is not received - the question was a simple question originally in 2017 forwarded to DONER/R/2017/50012, DONER/R/2017/50017, DONER/R/2017/50018, DONER/R/2017/50019. Since the Ministry is flouting the sections on accountability to parliament and no action taken against it inspite of several applications and complaints etc etc CAG, fraudster, auditors, etc could dare to conspire.
5) Why is the information that the law is flouted and hence there are no details and no information is reported by;
• DONER and others who are duty bound to furnish the annual report • MOCAF duty bound to implement Companies acts and duty bound to report to parliament on working and administration of the acts • CAG whose duty it is to conduct performance audit • Lok and Rajya Sabha Secretariats who receive the information
6) Flouting of those laws emboldened criminal conspiracies and fraud and further no action is taken against delinquent auditors, CAG, public servants
7) These encouraged fraudsters in DHFL, ILFS etc etc and conspiring auditors and except for some action against some auditors of ILFS by NFRA no action has been taken.
8 ) The CPIO has not furnished the information and the FAA has closed the matter without conducting any proceedings.
Page 9 of 159) Necessary directions may be issued to all the CPIOs and FAA s and public authorities associated in the matter under Sec 25(3)(f) , 25(3)(g) 25(5) etc read with Sec 19(8)(a) and other provisions of the RTIA to improve without prejudice to action against the concerned CPIOs of DOHIN-R-2018-50110 DONERR-2018-50044 DONER-R-2018- 50046 DPENT-R-2018-50450 MCOAL-R-2018- 50219 MOCAF-R-2018-50610 MOPNG- R-2018-50514 MOSTL-R-2018-50072 POWER-R-2018- 50608 for unlawfully transferring the applications
10) The action against the CPIOs may be taken under Sec 19(8)(b) , 19(8)(c) , 20(1) and 20(2) of RTIA.
11) Such acts of the public authorities are against public interest and cause losses on the people on account of the consequent encouragements of CAG, fraudsters, auditors etc to conspire and defraud people of India and aid and abet and harbour delinquents."
Hearing Proceedings & Decision
5. The Appellant was present during the hearing through video conference and on behalf of the Respondent, A Fani Rao, Dy. Director (Legal) & CPIO; Uphar Sharma, Sr. AO & APIO, O/o CAG along with Ajay Kumar Jha, Director & CPIO, O/o Director General of Audit (Agriculture, Food & Water Resource) attended the hearing in person.
6. The Appellant at the outset wanted to ensure that his arguments are being recorded as he believes that in earlier matters, his arguments were not recorded, then he wanted some clarity regarding the nomenclature- O/o Pr. Director of Audit (Agriculture, Food & Water Resource), New Delhi from the Respondent, which was duly provided by Ajay Kumar Jha, Director & CPIO present during the hearing. Subsequent to this, the Appellant appeared to be having a one-on-one discussion at length with Ajay Kumar Jha, Director & CPIO agitating through words and references that remained largely incomprehensible to the bench. However, the officials present before the bench being privy to the intricacies of the subject matter facilitated the Appellant with clarifications/rebuttal/answers and it was also pointed out at some point that the issues discussed by the Appellant are in the nature of fresh queries perhaps. The Appellant was afforded adequate time to present his case, Page 10 of 15 however, he appeared to be inclined towards having a discussion with the Respondent and despite having heard his statements and arguments passively, the Commission was at a loss to understand what relief is being desired within the scope and ambit of the RTI Act from the Respondent.
7. The Respondent, A Fani Rao, Dy. Director (Legal) & CPIO referred to their written submissions of 13.02.2024 filed in both the cases wherein the action taken on the instant RTI Applications was stated and it was also affirmed that their office is not the custodian of any such information and that the RTI Applications were transferred to the O/o Pr. Director of Audit (Agriculture, Food & Water Resource), New Delhi. Further, in addition to answering to the Appellant's remarks and questions during the hearing, the Respondent urged to put forth a specific RTI Act related argument stating that the Appellant has been filing incomprehensible yet volumes of RTI Applications, that mostly entail hundreds of references and pages and their RTI Cell is compelled to remain dedicated to dealing with the Appellant's RTI Applications.
8. The Respondent, Ajay Kumar Jha, Director & CPIO, O/o Director General of Audit (Agriculture, Food & Water Resource) while conceding with the argument of A Fani Rao, Dy. Director (Legal) & CPIO regarding the repetitiveness of and lack of comprehension in the RTI Applications filed by the Appellant also referred to his written submissions dated 20.02.2024, filed separately in both the cases, stating inter alia as under, whilst also giving a point-wise submission to the queries/contents mentioned in the RTI Application(s):
CIC/CAGIN/A/2022/659233 "The reply to the RTI application dated 24.07.2022 was furnished to Shri T.V Sundaresan by Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of office of the Director General of Audit (Agriculture, Food and Water Resources). Kolkata branch office, Kolkata, vide letter no DGA(AF&WR)/KOI/Admn/RTI Act 2005/2022-23/169 dated 11.08.2022 (Annexure- IV), as per available records in the office.Page 11 of 15
For the rest of the information which was not available in the records of branch office, the RTI application dated 24.07.2022 was transferred to the concerned CPIOs (Northern Eastern Regional Agricultural Marketing Corporation Limited (NERAMAC). Ministry of Development of North East Region (MDONER)) vide letter nо DGA(AF&WR)/KOI/Admn/RTI Act. 2005/2022-23/165-166 dated 11.08.2022 (Annexure- V) by Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of office of the Director General of Audit (Agriculture, Food and Water Resources), Kolkata branch office. Kolkata.
The first appeal dated 05.09.2022 (Annexure-III) was received in this office on 08.09.2022. The reply to RTI first appeal was furnished to Shri T.V Sundaresan vide letter no 980/DGA/डी. जी. ए./ शासन/2022-23/4546 dated 04.10.2022 by First Appellate Authority of Office of the Director General of Audit (Agriculture, Food and Water Resources). Delhi..."
CIC/CAGIN/A/2022/660114:
"The reply to the RTI application dated 09.09.2022 was furnished to Shri T.V Sundaresan by Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of office of the Director General of Audit (Agriculture, Food and Water Resources), Kolkata branch office, Kolkata, vide letter no DGA(AF&WR)/KOI/Admn/RTI Act, 2005/2022-23/223 dated 23.09.2022 (Annexure III), as per available records in the office.
For the rest of the information which was not available in the records of branch office, the RTI application dated 09.09.2022 was transferred to the concerned CPIOs (Norther Eastern Regional Agricultural Marketing Corporation Limited (NERAMAC), Ministry of Development of North East Region (MDONER), Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) Ministry of Heavy Industries & Public Enterprises, Department of Public Enterprises (MoHI&PE, DPE)) holding such information vide letter no DGA(AF&WR)/KOI/Admn/RTIAct, 2005/2022-23/215-220 dated 23.09.2022 (Annexure IV) by Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of office of the Director General of Audit (Agriculture, Food and Water Resources), Kolkata branch office, Kolkata.Page 12 of 15
The First Appeal dated 11.10.2022 (Annexure V) was received in this office on 13.10.2022. The reply to first appeal was furnished to Shri T.V Sundaresan vide letter no 980/DGA/AFWR/Admn/2022-23/5241 dated 01.11.2022 (Annexure VI) by First Appellate Authority of Office of the Director General of Audit (Agriculture, Food and Water Resources), Delhi.
4. That the applicant has attached Queries from Para 3.1 to 20 in the second appeal. But the Queries from Para 13.1 to 20 were not received along with the RTI dated
09.09.2022. However, the queries from Para 13.1 to 13.6 are the same as sought by the applicant vide the similar RTI application which was dated 01.09.2018 (Annexure VII).
Thus, For para 13.1 and 13.4-13.6, the CPIO of PDA (AFWR), Kolkata branch office had already replied to Shri T.V Sundaresan vide letter no DGA AFWR/KOL/Admn/RTI Act, 2005/2022- 23/151 dated 04.08.2022 (Annexure VIII) in compliance of the CIC final order dated 21.06.2022 (Annexure XI) regarding RTI dated 01.09.2018.
For Para 13.2 and 13.3, the information was not available in the records of branch office and thus, the CPIO of PDA (AFWR). Kolkata branch office had already transferred to the concerned CPIOs (Norther Eastern Regional Agricultural Marketing Corporation Limited (NERAMAC). Ministry of Development of North East Region (MDONER), Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), Ministry of Heavy Industries & Public Enterprises, Department of Public Enterprises (MoHI&PE, DPE) vide letter no DGA AFWR/KOL/Admn. RTI Act. 2005/2022-23/143-148 dated 04.08.2022..."
9. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, and perusal of records, observes that the Appellant has neither sought for any information as envisaged under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act nor is the RTI Application conforming to the word limit prescribed under Rule 3 of RTI Rules, 2012 or is he asking for any relief that is amenable to the jurisdiction of the Commission under the RTI Act. The Appellant has merely filled pages galore with contents that bear no coherence or relevance to the mandate of the RTI Act, rather it reeks of absurdities and hypothesis to such a baffling extent that Page 13 of 15 warrants summary dismissal of the instant cases. The Respondent has provided certain clarifications and responses during the hearing to the Appellant which was although unwarranted, yet is found to be in keeping with the spirit of the RTI Act.
10. Here, it will not be out of place to refer to a decision of the Commission dated 25.09.2023 in File No. CIC/LOKSS/A/2022/659793, wherein, similar or related subject matter appears to have been discussed i.e relating to CAG audit reports etc. and the following was observed:
"The Commission has previously heard the Appellant in File No. CIC/PAROI/A/2022/659898 and in File No. CIC/DPENT/A/2022/660014 and the following decision contained therein is squarely applicable to the instant case:
'The Commission over the course of time has decided several matters filed by the Appellant (accessible here at https://cic.gov.in/) and a common observation in most of these cases has been the sheer incoherence and yet mammoth contents placed on record by the Appellant making the exercise of deducing of what relief is desired by him under the RTI Act impossible. The Appellant has also been extensively advised on multiple occasions regarding the ambit of the RTI Act and what "information"
stands for within the RTI framework. For the sake of brevity, none of the earlier observations are being reiterated here and it is observed that the instant RTI Application also fails to qualify under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act and no relief amenable to the jurisdiction of the Commission under the RTI Act is being sought for in the Second Appeal, yet the CPIO & FAA have facilitated the Appellant with due diligence and have meticulously dealt with the RTI Application & First Appeal upholding the letter and spirit of the RTI Act.'.."
11. Having observed as above, no action is warranted in the instant matter(s). The Respondent(s) are however directed to send a copy of their respective written submissions dated 13.02.2024 and 20.02.2024 to the Appellant, if not already provided.
Page 14 of 1512. The Appeal(s) are dismissed accordingly.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
आनंदी राम लंगम)
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनं म
सूचना आयु )
Information Commissioner (सू
दनांक/Date: 28.02.2024
Authenticated true copy
Col S S Chhikara (Retd) कन ल एस एस िछकारा, ( रटायड )
Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक)
011-26180514
Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO
O/o. The Comptroller &
Auditor General of India,
Nodal CPIO, RTI Cell, Pocket-9,
Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Marg,
New Delhi-110124.
2. The CPIO
O/o. The Principal Director
of Audit (Agriculture, Food
Water Resources), Delhi, Nodal CPIO,
RTI Cell, (Indian Audit & Accounts Department),
New Delhi-110002.
3. Sundaresan
Page 15 of 15