Central Information Commission
Mr.S K Rathee vs Ministry Of Home Affairs on 10 September, 2010
Central Information Commission
Room No. 5, Club Building, Near Post Office
Old J.N.U. Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel No: 26161997
Case No. CIC/SS/A/2010/000325
Name of the Appellant : Shri S.K. Rathee
(The Appellant was not Present)
Name of the Public Authority : Delhi Police, Outer Distt.
Pushpanjali, Delhi
Represented by Shri Om Kumar,APIO,
Shri Dilip Shukla, Inspector and Shri
Madan Lal, S.I.
The matter was heard on : 10.9.2010.
ORDER
Shri S.K. Rathee, the Appellant, vide his application dated 24.11.2009
requested for the following information under the RTI Act, 2005 from the
PIO/Outer District:
"Copy of the statement of Shri Surinder Singh Solanki S/o Shri Munshi
Ram of Village and P.O. Poonth Kalan, Delhi taken down by S.I. Shri Gulshan
or his official of Police /Station Sultanpuri Delhi41 in compliance to the
complaint diaried on DD No.308 dated 1.11.2008 in Police Station, Sultanpuri,
Delhi41."
Shri B.K Singh, PIO, Outer District, Delhi, Office of the Addl. DCP1, vide
his reply dated 24.12.2009 informed the appellant as follows:
"In reference to your application dated 24.1.2009 which was received in
this office on 30.11.2009 for seeking information under Right to Information
Act, 2005, I am to state the reply on the basis of report/comments/documents
obtained from SHO/Sultan Puri through ACP/Sultan Puri/Outer District, Delhi,
that as per available record of P.S/.Sultan Puri, Delhi no statement was
recorded by S.I. Gulshan Gupta in respect of Shri Surinder Singh Solanki, S/o
Shri Munshi Ram, R/o Vill. Pooth Kalan, Delhi during the enquiry of the
complaint received vide DD No. 30B dated 1.11.2008 P.S. Sultan Puri, Delhi."
Not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant filed the first
appeal before the First Appellate Authority. Smt. Chhaya Sharma, DCP, Outer
District/FAA vide order dated 26.3.2010 reiterated the reply of CPIO, Outer
District. Not satisfied with the reply of FAA, the Appellant filed the present
appeal before the Commission in which he submits that he has not been
provided the requisite documents by the Respondent.
During the hearing the Respondent submits that requisite reply to the
RTI application has been provided to the Appellant within the time specified in
the RTI Act, 2005.
After hearing the Respondent and on perusal of relevant documents on
file, the Commission is of the view that requisite information as per record and
permissible under the RTI Act has been provided to the Appellant.
With these observations the matter is disposed off on the part of
Commission.
(Sushma Singh)
Information Commissioner
10.09.2010