Central Information Commission
Manzoor Ahmed Mattoo vs Ut Of Jammu And Kashmir on 14 June, 2022
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली,
ली New Delhi - 110067
िशकायत सं या / Complaint No. CIC/UTOJK/C/2020/678866
Shri Mohan Choudhary िशकायतकता /Complainant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, Chief Conservator of Forests (Central) ... ितवादीगण /Respondent
O/o the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests
Jammu & Kashmir
Through: Shri Kuldeep Raj
Date of Hearing : 08.06.2022
Date of Decision : 14.06.2022
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Y. K. Sinha
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 12.03.2018
PIO replied on : 04.04.2018
First Appeal filed on : 11.04.2018
First Appellate Order on : 20.04.2018
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 21.07.2020
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 12.03.2018 seeking information on the following 06 points:Page 1 of 5
Having not received any response from the CPIO, the complainant filed a First Appeal dated 11.04.2018. The FAA, O/o the PCCF's Office, J&K, Jammu vide order dated 20.04.2018 issued the following directions:-
Meanwhile vide letter dated 16.04.2018 sent by O/o Pr. Chief Conservator of Forests, J&K the Complainant was informed that information sought by him is not available in records of the PCCF's office.Page 2 of 5
In compliance with the FAA's order, the Chief Conservator of Forests(Central), J&K vide letter dated 24.04.2018 replied as under:-
The O/o Conservator of Forest, Chenab Circle vide letter dated 25.06.2018 furnished information as follows:
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Complainant approached the State Information Commission with the instant Complaint. The SIC, J&K, vide order dated 13.08.2018 held as under:-Page 3 of 5
In compliance of the SIC's ororder, a reply dated 31.10.2018 was sent by PIO, O/o Conservator of Forest, Chenab Circle reiterated their statement about non availability of any record in response to the queries raised by the Complainant.
The Complainant filed a non compliance application before the SIC, J&K on 24.04.2019,, which was heard and decided vi vide de order dated 25.04.2019 granting another opportunity to the PCCF, J&K to provide the desired information to the Complainant.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
A written submission has been received from the Complainant vide letter dated 30.05.2022, reiterating the facts noted above.
A written submission has been received from PIO, PCCF, J&K vide letter dated
02.06.2022,, enclosing therewith a letter dated 01.06.2022 containing the following information:
A seniority list of Foresters (DDR Trained) working as RO -II dated 03.02.2003 has also been placed on record by the Respondent.
A statement dated 02.06.2022 of the Third party has also been received stating that information sought by the Complainant being his personal information qualified for exemption under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act 2005 2005.. Two decisions of the Commission mentioned in the statement have been attached therewith, therewith wherein similar information had been sought about the Appellant and the Commission vide orders dated 15.07.2020 and 22.06.2021 had declined disclosure of the same upholding the exemption under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act claimed by the PIO.
Another written submission signed by CPIO on 04.06.2022 has also been received ed reiterating the facts noted above.
Hearing was scheduled through video conference after giving prior notice to the relevant parties. Both parties are present for hearing and reiterated their respective contentions, as mentioned in the aforementioned do documents.
cuments.Page 4 of 5
The Complainant has alleged during the course of hearing that the third party Shri Tejbahadur Singh is underqualified for the post and hence he wanted to uncover this fact through this case.
Decision Perusal of the facts of the case reveals that the instant case appears to be in the nature of a cross complaint filed by the Complainant against the Third Party, as is evident from the submissions of the Third party. The third party and the Complainant have sought information about each other, to settle some personal score thereby misusing the provisions of the RTI Act.
Be that as it may, in so far as records of this case are concerned, it is noted that the educational qualification and date of joining of service of the third party has been provided by the Respondent vide letter dated 01.06.2022. Furnishing the same set of information at the initial stage, in response to the RTI Application would have prevented the long drawn litigation in this case. Hence the Respondent is cautioned to be diligent and strictly adhere to the timeline and provisions of the RTI Act, in future cases, as such lapses will not be excused henceforth.
In so far as the Complainant's allegations about the Third party being not qualified enough for the post of Forester, such irregularities in service records if any, should be addressed within the organisation but certainly not under provisions of the RTI Act.
Under the given circumstances, since the information has been furnished and no case of malafide is observed in the instant case, hence for lack of any cause of action, the case is disposed off with no further directions.
वाई.
वाई. के . िस हा)
Y. K. Sinha (वाई िस हा
Chief Information Commissioner((मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . िचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 5 of 5