Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr.Shyam Sunder vs Department Of Personnel And … on 26 July, 2010

Central Information Commission
Mr.Shyam Sunder vs Department Of Personnel And … on 26 July, 2010
                   CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
               Complaint No. - CIC/WB/C/2009/000203 dated: 24.02.'09
                    Right to Information Act- Section 18

Complainant:        Shri Shyam Sunder
Respondent:         Department of Personnel & Training (DoP&T), New Delhi.
                        Decision announced 26.7.'10
Facts

:-

The Commission has received a complaint from Shyam Sunder of
Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh that his request submitted to the Central Public
Information Officer, Department of Personnel & Training, New Delhi, seeking
information regarding financial up-gradation under revised ACP scheme which he
should get in light of his service conditions as stated in the application, has not
been responded to, although the same was duly submitted along with requisite
fee dated 05.01.2009.

Admitting the complaint of Shri Shyam, the Commission served notice on
CPIO, DoP&T, New Delhi on 01.04.2010 for furnishing comments on the
complaint. In his response CPIO, Shri A. K. Srivastava, Under Secretary, DoP&T,
New Delhi submitted his comments on 16.04.2010 with a copy endorsed to
complainant. The CPIO has informed the Commission that the application dated
05.01.2009 of the complainant was received on 27.01.2009 and was responded
to by him on 19.02.2009. CPIO has further submitted that on receipt of a copy of
complaint dated 24.02.2009 from Shri Shyam Sunder to CIC, the factual position
was also informed to CIC with a copy to Shri Shyam Sunder vide letter dated
18.03.2009. The CPIO has enclosed the copies of relevant letters sent to the
complainant with his comments.

Decision Notice
From a perusal of the facts before us in the comments of the CPIO it is
clear that the application dated 05.01.2009 of the complainant has been
responded to by the CPIO and that within the time mandated by the law. Hence,

1
the complaint for failure to respond to the request does not stand and is hereby
dismissed.

The complainant is hereby advised that should he find the response
unsatisfactory, he might approach the 1st appellate authority of the DoPT and
consequently, if not satisfied with the information provided on his 1st appeal he
will be at liberty to file 2nd appeal before us u/s 19(3) of the Act.

Announced on this twenty-sixth day of July 2010 in open chambers.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.

Wajahat Habibullah
(Chief Information Commissioner)
26.07.2010

Authenticated true copy, additional copies of order shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charge prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of
this Commission.

Pankaj K. P. Shreyaskar
Joint Registrar.

26.07.2010

2