CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000236/SG/13020
Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000236/SG
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. S.R. Hussain,
General Secretary, H. No. 948,
Sector -7C, Faridabad
Respondent : Mrs. Madhu Sham,
PIO & Dy. Secretary
Central Vigilance Commission,
Satarkta Bhawan, INA, GPO Complex,
Block - A, New Delhi -110 023.
RTI application filed on : 07/04/2010
Reply of the PIO : 07/05/2010
Reply of the PIO after FAA order : 08/07/2010
First appeal filed on : 13/05/2010
FAA order : 11/06/2010
Second appeal received on : 01/10/2010
Information sought in the RTI Application :
With reference to the above cited letters of the MoWR to the CVC, the following authenticated
information / documents may please be supplied:
1. Complete CVC note sheet, along with enclosures, bearing proposal of initiating officer of the CVC
and recommendation and approval of the competent authority thereon upon receipt of the afore-
said letters addressed to Shri Prabhat Kumar, by. Secy. (mentioned at Sl. No. 1 to 5) and Shri Sunil
Goutam, by, Secy. (mentioned at SI. No. (i) and (ii))
2. CVC documents bearing action taken by said Shri Kumar and Goutam on the letters respectively
addressed to them.
3. CVC documents communicated to the MoWR which bears final decision of the CVC in respect
of the afore-said letters received from the MoWR.
4. Present status of the subject matter mentioned in the afore said letters;
Reply of the PIO :
The reply is as under:
“The references quoted in your application have no any collatable details. Please provide details about
Commission’s File, Diary Nos. etc. for obtaining information based on such references.”
Grounds for First appeal:
Information has not been provided.
FAA order:
The CPIO concerned, that is, Shri Sunil Gautam, Director is directed to consider, on merits, providing the
information sought by the Appellant in his RTI Application dated 07.04.2010, after ascertaining the
position (about the letters cited by the Appellant in his RTI Application dated 07.04.2010) through the
DM15 system/Diary Section, keeping in view’ the letter & spirit of the RTI Act and various provisions
thereof.
Reply of the PIO after FAA order :
The reply is as under:
“From the DMIS System/Diary Section wherein the details of the 6 references of MoWR quoted in your
application have been mentioned, it is noticed that these references have been processed/submitted in
different concerned files of the Commission and their details are not available therein(i.e. in DMIS).
However, the information can be provided if RTI Applicant mentions the details of Commission’s files in
his application so that the same can be located.”
Grounds for Second appeal:
The information sought for has still not been provided.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. S.R. Hussain;
Respondent: Mrs. Madhu Sham, PIO & Dy. Secretary;
The Appellant claims that certain letters were sent to CVC. The PIO has stated that there is no
record of such letters and hence no information can be provided. The appellant contends that these letters
are definitely on the records but has no evidence to support this.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
22 June 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (SS)