Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

and background of the case:

(1) CIC/NPCOI/A/2021/147959 The Appellant filed an online RTI application dated17.01.2021 seeking information on the following:-

The CPIO/, NPCIL, Rawatbhatta, Rajasthan, vide letter dated 09.02.2021 replied as under:-

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated27.02.2021. The FAA/AD(CP&CC), NPCIL, Mumbai , vide order dated 13.10.2021 upheld the reply of the CPIO.

The Respondent represented by Smt Ayesha Khatum, Dy Manager (HR), NPCIL, Rawatbhata participated in the hearing through video conference. She reiterated the replies available on record and stated that the information was denied u/s 8 (1) (j) since it was personal information of a third party and no larger public interest was justified by the Appellant.

Decision Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission directs the CPIO, NPCIL Rawatbhata to communicate to the Appellant the broad outcome of the action taken on his complaint by 31.01.2023 under intimation to the Commission.

With the above direction, the instant Second Appeal stands disposed off accordingly.

(2) CIC/NPCOI/A/2021/649328 The Appellant filed an online RTI application dated 20.08.2021 seeking information on the following:-

The CPIO NPCIL,Mumbai, vide letter dated 15.09.2021 replied as under:-

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 19.09.2021. The FAA/AD(CP&CC), NPCIL, Mumbai, vide order dated 01.10.2021 upheld the reply of the CPIO.

The Respondent represented by Shri S.K. Srivastava, CPIO and AGM (HR), NPCIL, Mumbai; Shri Vinod Tirkey, Sr Manager, NPCIL, Mumbai and Shri Sanjay Arora, GM (Vigilance), NPCIL, Mumbai participated in the hearing through video conference. Shri Srivastava stated that correct information as per available records regarding the action taken on his representation has been provided to the Appellant.

Decision:

Keeping in view the facts of the case and the submissions made by both the parties, the Commission is of the view that an appropriate response as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 has been provided since the broad outcome on the action taken on the complaint has been disclosed.