Vide CIC order No: CIC/SS/A/2012/000851, the PIO was directed to provide copy of enquiry report, file notings, disposal to the appellant - Appellant complained that the same were not provided - CIC: fresh enquiry by a senior officer into the complaint
Shri Hansraj Chugh has filed the present noncompliance petition dated 15.01.2013 before the Commission against the respondent namely Delhi Police West. The Appellant was in person present in the hearing whereas from the Respondent side CPIO Shri Raj Kumar (SHO/Janak Puri PS); Shri Chandra Shekhar (SI/ICDIC) and Shri Rajender Kumar (SI) were present in the hearing.
2. The present case relates to petition dated 15.01.2013 complaining that the Commission’s order No: CIC/SS/A/2012/000851 dated 31.10.2012 has not been complied with by the Respondent. Through the said order the CPIO was directed “to provide information required at point No.8 i.e. copy of enquiry report, file notings, disposal to the Appellant within 10 days of receipt of this order”.
3. Acting on complaint of the Appellant, the Commission issued notice to the parties for hearing. In response to hearing notice, Respondent filed his written submission wherein he mentions that in compliance with the directions of the Commission, the CPIO vide letter No: I.D.2940/ 11/8858/DIC (DAI)/ West District dated 14.12.2012 replied to the Appellant as follows: “…The copy of relevant report along with copy of statement in respect of Shri B.M Singhal (total page3s), have already been obtained by you from this office on 2.10.2012. However, copy of the same is again sent herewith as directed.”
4. During hearing before the Commission, the Appellant submits that the CPIO has given a copy of enquiry report to him which pertains to all complaints which were filed against him by 5 different persons. Appellant submits that some of the complainants are fake, fictitious & nonexistent. The Appellant questions the enquiry report of the I.O and how the I.O came to the conclusion in his enquiry report that the matter has been sort out by him with nonexistent complainants. The Appellant submits that the report of the I.O is false, fabricated and bogus. Appellant submits the he want to know how and on what basis the matter is shown as “sorted out” by the Police in its enquiry report when in fact there are no such complainants and they are nonexistent.
5. After hearing the submission of the Appellant, the Commission observes that the RTI application of the Appellant is regarding the status of 5 complaints which have filed against him by 5 different complainants in the Police Station Janak Puri. Appellant specifically asked 2 querries in his RTI Application in respect of the status of all 5 complaints which were filed against him by 5 different complainants. The Appellant has right to get correct reply from the Respondent in reply to his RTI application.
6. The Commission hereby directs the CPIO to conduct the enquiry afresh on the complaints which were filed against the Appellant by 5 different complainants by a senior officer who must ensure that Appellant’s statement is recorded. Commission further directs the CPIO to apprise the Appellant of the names of persons who have filed the complaints against the Appellant and also whether they are genuine or fictitious persons. Moreover, the CPIO/FAA are also expected to take appropriate action against the IO, if it is found that a wrong enquiry report was submitted by him. The order of the Commission is to be complied within 3 weeks of receipt of this order.
Citation: Shri Hansraj Chugh v. Delhi Police West in Case No: CIC/SS/A/2013/000549