Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Swati Saini vs Delhi Subordinate Services Selection ... on 30 September, 2022

Author: Uday Mahurkar

Bench: Uday Mahurkar

                                      के न्द्रीयसच
                                                 ू नाआयोग
                          Central Information Commission
                                    बाबागगं नाथमागग,मुननरका
                           Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                            नईनिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

द्वितीयअपीलसंख्या / Second Appeal No.:- CIC/DSSSB/A/2022/608860-UM

Ms. Swati Saini
                                                                        ....अपीलकताा/Appellant

                                         VERSUS
                                           बनाम

CPIO,
Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB)
FC-18, INSTITUTIONAL AREA, KARKARDOOMA
{NEAR RAILWAY RESERVATION CENTER}, DELHI-110092



                                                                     ....प्रद्वतवादीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing     :            28.09.2022
Date of Decision    :            29.09.2022



Date of RTI application                                                 17.11.2021
CPIO's response                                                         Not on record
Date of the First Appeal                                                20.12.2021
First Appellate Authority's response                                    Not on record
Date of diarized receipt of Appeal by the Commission                    Nil

                                       ORDER

FACTS The Appellant vide RTI application sought information regarding response sheet of the TGT Computer Science Post.

Dissatisfied due to non-receipt of any reply from the CPIO, the appellant approached the FAA.The order of the FAA, if any, is not on the record of the Commission. Thereafter, the Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission.

HEARING:

Facts emerging during the hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: The appellant's representative Shri Mayank Kumar attended the hearing through Audio Conference.

Respondent: The respondent Shri Manoj Surin, SO attended the hearing in person.

The appellant's representative through Audio Conference informed the Commission that he does not want to pursue the present matter and requested the Commission to drop the proceedings. The Respondent present during the hearing submitted that a suitable response in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, had already been furnished to the Appellant.

DECISION:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and considering the request made by the appellant not to pursue the matter further, the appeal is hereby dismissed as 'Withdrawn'.

The Appeal stands disposed accordingly.

(Uday Mahurkar) (उदय माहूरकर) (Information Commissioner) (सच ू ना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अद्विप्रमाद्वणत एवं सत्याद्वपत प्रद्वत) (R. K. Rao) (आर.के . राव) (Dy. Registrar) (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182598 द्वदनांक / Date: 29.09.2022 Page 2 of 2