dsUnzh; lwpuk vk;ksx
Central Information Commission
Case No. CIC/AT/C/2008/00460
Dated: 24.12.2009
Complainant: Shri Ramesh Chand Handa
Respondents: Registrar of Co-operative Society
ORDER
This complaint is filed by Shri Ramesh Chand Handa against Registrar of Co-operative Society
regarding non-compliance of Commission’s Order dated 17.9.2007 in Case No. CIC/AT/A/2007/00794.
2. In his complaintt, Shri Handa stated that in the above Order Commission had directed PIO to furnish
information within 2 weeks; but he did not receive any information from PIO. Even, there was no response
from them on his subsequent reminder.
3. Commission invited the comments of PIO. In her comments, PIO stated that on receipt of the
Commission’s order dated 17.9.2007, a copy of the same was forwarded to the 3rd-party vide letter dated
8.10.2007. Subsequently, the complainant was also advised to attend the office of the Society to collect the
required documents / Audit Reports available with them. Copies of the information received from the
Society, were forwarded to the complainant vide letter 17.4.2008. Vide letter dated 7.5.2008, the complaint
was again informed that the copies duly authenticated by the President of the Society had already been
provided to him and apart from those copies, no other additional information was available with the 3rd-
party. The complaint was again advised that he can verify these facts after visiting the Society and he can get
other residual information, if any. In the meanwhile, the public authority appointed an Inspection Officer to
inquire into charges against the Society. A copy of Inspection Report submitted by the Inspector was also
provided to the complainant. The complainant had been asking same documents again and again from
various authorities. The PIO also confirmed that all the available information / documents relating to his
RTI-application have been provided to him by the Society.
4. Commission observed that the requisite information has already been made provided to the
complainant by the respondents / 3rd parties. The complainant had also advised to visit the office of the 3rd-
party and verify the documents given by them and in case, the complainant required any other documents, he
could obtain the same. Thus, Commission finds that the said order has been complied with. Therefore, there
is no merit in the complaint, which is closed at the Commission’s end.
Sd/-
(D.C. Singh)
Deputy Registrar