Information related to action taken by IIT, BHU regarding Inspection of GPIs through Technical Institution for compliance verification of effluent discharge standards - CIC: A clear reply should be provided that there is no such information existing
The appellant has sought the following information related to the action taken by IIT, BHU on letter no. F No. 19004/NGRBA/CPBP/2015-16 dated 09.03.2017 regarding Inspection of GPIs through Technical Institution for Compliance verification of effluent discharge standards, received in the office of the Director, IIT (BHU) on 10.03.2017:
1. Certified copy of minutes of meeting to constitute expert team and nomination of nodal officer.
2. Copy of consent letter of the person who agreed to become member of the expert team to carry out the inspection of GPIs.
3. Industrial regions allocated to IIT (BHU) for inspection of GPIs.
4. Numbers of GPIs visited by expert team in allocated region.
5. Other related information.
Grounds for Second Appeal
The CPIO did not provide the desired information.
Submissions made by Appellant and Respondents during Hearing:
The CPIO submitted that after the transfer of the queries to another department, a reply was provided to the appellant on 21.06.2017. On a specific query by the Commission whether any expert team had been formed, he replied in the negative. On another query by the Commission with regard to allocation of industrial regions to IIT, BHU for inspection of GPIs, he again indicated that no such allocations had been done.
From a perusal of the relevant case records, it appears that other than point no 1 of the RTI application, all other queries have been replied to in the negative, further , most of the queries seem to flow from the first and second questions. Since these replies are in the negative, the other replies would also be so. Under the circumstances, it appears that there is no further reply that can be given by the CPIO. Moreover, since the appellant was not present to contest the reply, no further action is warranted in the matter.
The CPIO is directed to resend the reply dated 21.06.2017, with regard to point no. 1, with the details of appointment of the nodal officer and for the remaining queries, a clear reply should be provided to the appellant indicating that there is no such information existing in the concerned department and hence the information is ‘nil’. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna
Citation: Sunil Kumar Paswan v. Joint Regsitrar (Admn.)/ The CPIO & Nodal Officer Indian Institute of Technology Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi in Decision no.: CIC/BANHU/A/2017/171328/00245, Date of Decision: 14/03/2019