Central Information Commission
Raghav Goel vs Passport Office on 6 August, 2025
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के 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/PASOF/A/2024/132948
Shri Raghav Goel ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, RPO, Amritsar, Ministry of External Affairs ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 04.08.2025
Date of Decision : 04.08.2025
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 05.05.2024
PIO replied on : - -
First Appeal filed on : 17.06.2024
First Appellate Order on : - -
2 Appeal/complaint received on
nd : 10.10.2024
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 05.05.2024 seeking information on the following points:-
1. "Provide the certified copies of police verification reports proceeded, the mandatory document/ requirement to issue the passport.
2. Inform me whether my name specified on the passport is true.
3. Inform me whether my father's name on the passport is true.
4. Inform me whether my date of birth on the passport is true.
5. Inform me whether my residential address on the passport is true or wrong.
6. Inform me whether my school certificate, the mandatory document to issue the passport is true or fake.
7. Whether the passport is ever been used by the applicant till date, provide its information.
8. Whether there is any violation of the provisions prescribed under section 12 of passport act, provide its information.
9. Refer to your reply vide file no. POA/121/23/RTI dated 27.12.2023, booked on 24.04.2024, speed post no EP834647008IN after 4 months, wherein certified copy of passport is refused as per judgement: The Registrar, Madras HC v. CIC and Ms B. Bharathi, Provide the information of the Specific Para whereupon you had relied.
10. Provide the information of detailed provisions specified under passport act to freeze a passport. Etc.."Page 1 of 2
Dissatisfied with the non-receipt of information from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 17.06.2024 which was not adjudicated by the FAA as per available records.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.
Appellant: Shri Ashok Kumar- father and authorised representative of the Appellant was heard through video conference Respondent: Shri Gagan Gupta represented RPO, Amritsar during hearing. The Appellant's representative stated that no information had been received in this case from the Respondent. The Respondent stated that neither the RTI application nor the First Appeal had been received by the RPO, Amritsar and hence no response could be sent to the Appellant.
Decision:
Upon perusal of records of the instant case, the Respondent-PIO, RPO, Amritsar is hereby directed to revisit the queries raised by the Appellant and provide a point wise reply to him strictly in consonance with the provisions of the RTI Act, based on available records, the Appellant within four weeks of receipt of this order. The Respondent shall submit a compliance report in this regard within a week of thereafter before the Commission.
The appeal is 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 2 of 2 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)