Central Information Commission
Bhopal Singh vs Department Of Forest And Wild Life on 19 August, 2023
Author: Uday Mahurkar
Bench: Uday Mahurkar
केन्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईदिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
शिकायतसंख्या / Complaint No. CIC/DOFWL/C/2022/150330-UM
Mr. Bhopal Singh
....शिकायतकताग/Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
O/o. The Deputy Conservator Of Forests,
Nodal Pio, Rti Cell,
Department Of Forest And Wild Life,
West Forest Division, Mandir Lane,New Delhi-110060
.... प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 10.08.2023
Date of Decision : 18.08.2023
Date of RTI application 15.07.2022
CPIO's response 28.09.2022
Date of the First Appeal 06.09.2022
First Appellate Authority's response 12.10.2022
Date of diarized receipt of Complaint by the Commission 26.10.2022
ORDER
FACTS The Complainant vide his RTI application sought information on 04 points, as under:-
Page 1 of 3The CPIO,Department Of Forest And Wild Life, vide letter dated 28.09.2022 furnished a reply to the Complainant. Dissatisfied with the reply received from the PIO, the Complainant filed a First Appeal. FAA vide order dated 12.10.2022 upheld the reply of PIO.Thereafter, the Complainant filed a Complaint before the Commission.
HEARING:
Facts emerging during the hearing:
The following were present:
Complainant: Present in Person Respondent: Absent The Complainant while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application submitted that he had sought information regarding the construction, repair and budget of the boundary wall at Khasra number- 630 by the forest department. He said incomplete information has been furnished to him. The complainant further said that the budget for the boundary wall to be constructed was Rs. 1 crore 76 lakhs, which they claimed not to be properly allocated. Hence he said he had sought information about the details of the allocation of the concerned funds.
He claimed that on ground level no boundary was actually constructed and it is only shown on the papers. He further alleged that there is fraud and corruption in this project and misuse of public money, thereby claiming this information to be in public interest. He added that he had sought a Page 2 of 3 map indicating Khasra no. 630 which is mentioned in point no. 4 of the RTI application but no map has been given to him yet.
The complainant further requested the Commission to treat his complaint as a second appeal and direct the respondent to furnish complete information to him.
The Respondent remained absent during the hearing.
DECISION:
Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by the Complainant, the Commission in response to the plea of the Complainant treats the complaint as a special case and directs the CPIO to re-examine the matter and furnish correct, complete and detailed information to the Complainant along with the copy of Map sought in point no. 4 of the RTI Application, strictly in accordance with the spirit of transparency and accountability as enshrined in the RTI Act, 2005 within a period of 30 days from the receipt of this order under the intimation to the Commission.
Further, the commission advises the CPIO to consider the case of the Complainant in the backdrop of the above facts to help the Complainant and take corrective action if required, thus adhering to the law of natural justice.
The Complaint stands disposed accordingly.
(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर)
(Information Commissioner) (सच ु )
ू ना आयक्त
Authenticated true copy
(अभिप्रमाभित एवं सत्याभित प्रभत)
(R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव)
(Dy. Registrar) (उि-िजं ीयक)
011-26182598 / [email protected]
भदनांक / Date: 18.08.2023
Page 3 of 3