Central Information Commission
Santosh Kumar Bhardwaj vs Ndmc on 5 August, 2021
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागं गनाथमागग ,मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नईदिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
द्वितीयअपीलसंख्या /Second Appeal No.: CIC/NDMCN/A/2019/125067
Santosh Kumar Bhardwaj .....अपीलकताा/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
1. Public Information Officer,
New Delhi Municipal Council,
Education Department, Palika Kendra,
New Delhi-110001.
...प्रद्वतवािीगण/Respondents
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 04.02.2019
CPIO replied on : 28.03.2019
First appeal filed on : 13.04.2019
First Appellate Authority order : Not on record
Second Appealreceived at CIC : 28.05.2019
Date of Hearing : 05.08.2021
Date of Decision : 05.08.2021
सूचनाआयुक्त: श्री हीरालाल सामररया
Information Commissioner: Shri Heeralal Samariya
Information sought:
The Appellant sought informationas under:Page 1 of 6
PIO vide letter dated 28.03.2019 provided following reply:
Dissatisfied with the reply of the PIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 13.04.2019.
Written submission has been received from Appellant, vide letter dated 01.08.2021, for perusal before the Commission and taken on record.Page 2 of 6
FAA, vide order dated 04.08.2021, held as under:
Page 3 of 6Written submission has been received from PIO, O/o Jt. Director (Edn.), NDMC, vide letter dated 05.08.2021, as under:
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The PIO has not provided desired information to the Appellant.Page 4 of 6
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present: -
Appellant:Present on phone.
Respondent:Mr. R.P. Satti, PIO, Education Department, NDMC, present on phone.
Appellant stated that appropriate reply, in the instant matter, has not been furnished to him. He further stated that the reply furnished by the concerned PIO is misleading and vague.
PIO submitted a detailed written submission for perusal before the Commission. PIO also submitted that he would abide by the orders of Commission, if any.
Decision:
The current milieu of the pandemic COVID-19 has necessitated the Commission to take some extraordinary steps in the disposal of cases to avoid further backlog and delays subverting the very purpose of RTI Act which includes inter alia hearing cases through audio conferencing.
Commission, on the basis of perusal of case records and submission made by the parties during hearing, directs the PIO to revisit the instant RTI Application and provide a revised reply to the appellant, with regard to the instant RTI Application, free of cost via speed post, within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and accordingly, compliance report to this effect be duly sent to the Commission by the PIO. In case relevant information, as sought in the instant RTI Application, pertains to some other Branch/Department, then the PIO should procure and provide the same to the Appellant. In doing so, PIO must make sure that information which is exempted from disclosure under RTI Act, 2005 must not be disclosed to the appellant.
In case relevant records are still not traceable despite searching thoroughly, then PIO must file an appropriate affidavit stating that relevant records as sought in instant the RTI Application is not available in record despite searching thoroughly.
The said affidavit shall be sent by the PIO to the Commission with its copy duly endorsed to the Appellant. The said direction of the Commission must be Page 5 of 6 complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and accordingly compliance report to this effect be duly sent to the Commission by the PIO. No further action lies.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया)
Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त)
Authenticated true copy
(अनिप्रमानितसत्यानितप्रनत)
Ram Parkash Grover (राम प्रकाश ग्रोवर)
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक)
011-26180514
Page 6 of 6