290 HarishTripathiVsMoUD 11 05 3 5/11/2009 12:49:07 Deepak 1
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No.308, B wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
Appeal No. CIC/LS/A/2009/000290/
Appellant: Shri Harish Tripathi
Public Authority: Land and Development Office
Ministry of Urban Development
(through Shri R.K. Sinha, L&DO; &
Shri Vijay Tehlan, Deputy L&DO)
Date of Hearing: 11/05/2009
Date of Decision: 11/05/2009
FACTS
:-
By his letter of 31/07/2008, the Appellant had requested for information on 12
paras relating to the affairs of Gymkhana Club, New Delhi. The CPIO had provided
point-wise information to the Appellant vide his letter dated 01/09/2008. However,
before the receipt of CPIO’s response, the Appellant had filed first Appeal vide letter
dated 01/09/2008 which was disposed of by the Appellate Authority vide order dated
11/09/2008.
2. Dissatisfied with the order of the Appellate Authority, he has filed the present
Appeal before this Commission.
3. The matter was heard on 11/05/2009. The Appellant appeared before the
Commission. The Public Authority is represented by the officers named above. It is the
submission of the Appellant that when he filed the first Appeal after the expiry of 30
days, the response of the CPIO had not reached him and that now he is not satisfied with
the responses of CPIO on a number of paras. It is his submission that first Appeal was
decided on a technical ground ex parte and not on merits inasmuch as the merit issue had
not been agitated by him in the absence of the response of CPIO. He, therefore, requests
that the matter may be remanded back to the first Appellate Authority to decide the
matter afresh after giving him an opportunity of hearing. It is also his submission that he
may be supplied copies of documents as requested for by him, free of cost and that he
also may be allowed to carry out inspections of the relevant records, including file
notings, without any let or hindrance.
4. Shri Sinha would, however, submit that he has no objection to giving the
Appellant an opportunity of hearing and deciding the Appeal afresh. However, going by
past experience, it is his apprehension that the Appellant is not likely to sign the relevant
documents in token of his visit to L&D Office for carrying out the inspection of the files.
The Appellant, however, vehemently protests against it.
290 HarishTripathiVsMoUD 11 05 3 5/11/2009 12:49:07 Deepak 2
5. After hearing the parties, the following decision is recorded:-
(i) the matter is remanded back to Shri R.K. Sinha, AA, for deciding the
matter afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Appellant, in
four weeks time;
(ii) the Appellant would be permitted to carry out inspection of the relevant
records on mutually convenient date/(s);
(iii) the documents requested for by the Appellant would be provided to him
free of cost; and
(iv) after carrying out the inspection, the Appellant would append his
signatures on the relevant records in token of his having carried out
inspection of the files.
6. The matter is disposed of subject to the above directions.
Sd/-
(M.L. Sharma)
Central Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges,
prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this Commission.
(K.L. Das)
Assistant Registrar
Tele: 011 2671 73 53
Fax: 011 2610 62 76