A one stop destination for all Right to Information (RTI) matters

one stop destination for all Right to Information (RTI) matters

Information about change in options provided in the answer key for the post of AHO Gr B under the Medical Dept of East Coast Railway Bhubaneswar - CIC: Provide documentary proof that option A is the correct answer for Question No. 97

Appellant alleged false implication & victimization for wrongful and discriminatory dismissal from service - PIO: Manual of Departmental Security Instructions, 1994, is a Confidential document and is exempt from disclosure u/s 8(1)(a) - CIC: Denial upheld

Opportunity of inspection of records was granted which the appellant did not avail - Respondent: Appellant’s dismissal case is in progress; He files RTI applications to know about the progress of his case - CIC: Grant another opportunity of inspection

Information specifying the dates on which the Presiding Officer was in attendance for hearings at the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - CIC took an adverse view of the delay and cautioned the public authority to adhere to the timeline under RTI Act

CIC: Appellant is agitating a matter in which he has already been given a relief despite having indulged in bigamy - CIC referred the matter to DRM, North Western Railway to take note of the aberration of lenient view taken in a serious matter like Bigamy

Answer sheets of CBSE Board exam - CIC: PIO is neither aware nor mentioned the dispatched date of their reply; Did not upload it along with his written submission which shows lackadaisical approach; Explanation called for along with the comments of FAA

Vijai Sharma and K V Chowdary appointed as CIC and CVC respectively

Is the Mysore Police Commissioner’s office coming up without plan approval?

No action taken against the illegal massage parlours or spas in Goa

Are there norms about the fee a school should charge and the facilities it offers?

There is only 1 primary health centre per 28 villages of UP

Services of all OSDs / Consultants terminated by Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

Does non-maintenance of records defeat the rights accrued in favour of the RTI appellant?

Draft Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025 release by MeitY for public consultation

Delhi High Court directs Jamia Millia Islamia University to disclose PhD Thesis under the RTI Act

2nd edition of "PIOs Guide on RTI" published - Based on study of over one lakh orders of CIC and judgments of Courts - Book carries subject wise case laws, latest legal updates, Practical tips for PIOs and FAAs - Needs of all stakeholders covered

Share on facebook Tweet Email Gmail Google Rediff

Power to issue order to attend office during Covid - CIC: Appellant had suppressed the replies provided by PIO; He has not approached the CIC with clean hands and the conduct is not appreciated - CIC: Afford an opportunity of inspection of relevant record

27 Mar, 2025

Information sought:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 24.11.2023 (online) seeking the following information:

“Supply Certified copies of information as well as orders issued by the Govt. of Delhi regarding declaration of containment zone at Raj Nagar II, Palam Colony, Delhi-110077 during COVID-19 pandemic with date and area wise. Supply the Certified copies of orders by which to whom the power was given to issue orders in regard to attend office at the department level during COVID-19. ”

Having not received any response from the PIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 24.01.2024. The FAA vide order is not on record.

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

A written submission dated 22.02.2025 (copy marked to the appellant) has been filed by Shri Rajeev Kumar, Dy. Secretary/PIO, CM’s Office, Delhi is taken on record. Contents of the same are reproduced below for ready reference:

“1. As per the available record of online RTI portal the application of Sh. Jawahar Lal (Appellant) was received vide reference No. CMOFC/R/2023/60579 dated 24.11.2023 (Flag-A).

2. Since the information sought by the appellant pertains to the Revenue Department, GNCTD, the Chief Minister Office transferred the RTI Application to the Revenue Department, GNCTD, through online portal to the PIO, Revenue Department, GNCTD, under section 6(3) of RTI Act, 2005 as the queries related to that department on 28.11.2023. (Flag-B).

3. Subsequently, Sh. Jawahar Lal (Appellant) filed a First appeal online before the First Appellate Authority of CM Office vide registration No. CMOFC/A/2024/60006 dated 24.01.2024 (Flag-C).

4. The First Appellate Authority of Chief Minister Office disposed of the First appeal with the observation:-

"I have gone through the records. It is observed that PIO, CM Office on 28.11.2023 had transferred on-line RTI application to PIO, Revenue Department under section 6(3) of RTI Act, 2005 as the queries related to that department. Thus, PIO CM office responded timely"(Flag-D).

Accordingly, the above information is respectfully submitted for your kind consideration and appropriate disposal.”

A written submission dated 01.03.2025 (copy marked to the appellant) filed by Shri Harshit Saini, SDM/PIO, Dwarka, New Delhi is taken on record. Contents of the same are reproduced below for ready reference:

“This is with reference to the CIC's Notice No. CIC/00CMD /A/ 2024 /616750 dated 14.02.2025, which is forwarded to this office via email only on 28.02.2025, in the matter of RTI Application dated 24.11.2023 filed by Sh. Jawahar Lal R/o RZF-*******, Delhi-77. In this regard, it is to submit that the said notice dated l4.02.2025 of the Hon'ble Commission was received in the Sub-Division Office via email only on 28.02.2025. It is further submitted that the RTI Application dated 24.11.2023 has not been found received in this office. It is further humbly submitted that the undersigned has assumed the charge of PIO/SDM (Dwarka) only w.e.f. 30.11.2024 and was busy in Delhi Legislative Assembly Elections, being Returning Officer for AC-33 (Dwarka). In view of the above, the Hon’ble Commission is humbly requested to grant time so that the requisite information/appropriate response, if available on record, shall be provided to the appellant, as per provisions of RTI Act, 2005. The undersigned have utmost respect for the orders of Hon'ble Commission and is duty bound to comply with the directions as may be passed by this Hon'ble Commission.”

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Present in person.

Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, Dy. Secretary/PIO along with Shri Vikas, ASO Chief Minister’s Office, Delhi present in person. Shri Vikas Kumar, Sr. Assistant (on behalf of Shri Harshit Saini, SDM/PIO, Dwarka, New Delhi) present in person.

The appellant stated that he has received replies from the PIO during pendency of this appeal and a copy of the averred written submissions of the respondent few days back which is a delayed response. Further, he contended that desired information was yet to be provided to him by the respondents.

Shri Rajeev Kumar, Dy. Secretary/PIO stated that original RTI application has been transferred to the PIO, Revenue Department, GNCTD under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act for providing the information directly to the appellant. Further, the hearing notice was also transferred to the concerned department. He prayed the Commission that his role is over under the RTI Act as his office is not the actual custodian of information sought.

Shri Vikas Kumar, Sr. Assistant, SDM office, Dwarka stated that he has received RTI application with the hearing notice on 19.02.2025 and sought time from the Commission to draft a reply for facilitating information to the appellant. He further expressed his willingness to afford opportunity of inspection of relevant records to the appellant pertaining to this RTI Application which the appellant agreed to avail on a mutually decided date and time.

Decision:

At the outset, it is observed from the oral submissions and documents shown by the respondent during the hearing that the PIO, O/O Chief Minister, Delhi have provided suitable replies to the Appellant as per the provisions of RTI Act but the Appellant while filing the instant Appeal before the Commission had suppressed the averred replies. Thus, he has not approached the Commission with clean hands. The conduct is not appreciated.

Nonetheless, in furtherance of hearing proceedings, the Commission directs the respondent namely Shri Harshit Saini, PIO/SDM, Dwarka, New Delhi to afford an opportunity of inspection of records of information sought in the RTI application to the Appellant on a mutually decided date and time but not later than 4 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Intimation of date and time should be sent to the Appellant well in advance in writing within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Copy of records as may be desired by the Appellant be provided, upon receipt of applicable fees as per the RTI Rules. Information which are exempted from disclosure under the RTI Act may be redacted/blackened out.

First Appellate Authority to ensure compliance of the directions.

Role of the PIO, O/O Chief Minister, Delhi is hereby dispensed with.

The appeal is dismissed accordingly.

Vinod Kumar Tiwari

Information Commissioner

Citation: Jawahar Lal v. Chief Minister Office, Delhi, CIC/OOCMD/A/2024/616570; Date of Decision : 03.03.2025

Power to issue order to attend office during Covid - CIC: Appellant had suppressed the replies provided by PIO; He has not approached the CIC with clean hands and the conduct is not appreciated - CIC: Afford an opportunity of inspection of relevant record

Share your comments with RTI Foundation of India.