Central Information Commission Judgements

Smt. J.Shanthasaraswathy vs Central Excise, Chennai on 23 March, 2010

Central Information Commission
Smt. J.Shanthasaraswathy vs Central Excise, Chennai on 23 March, 2010
                      CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                                    .....

F.No.CIC/AT/A/2010/000052
Dated, the 23rd March, 2010.

Appellant : Smt. J.Shanthasaraswathy

Respondents : Central Excise, Chennai

This matter was heard through videoconference (VC) on
09.03.2010. Appellant, along with her Counsel, Shri L.P. Maurya, was
present at NIC VC at Chennai. Respondents ― represented by the CPIO
― were present at the same venue. Commission conducted the hearing
from its New Delhi office.

2. Appellant’s RTI-application dated 18.06.2009 was replied to by
CPIO on 03.07.2009 and her first-appeal was decided by Appellate
Authority, Shri Gandhidoss, Additional Commissioner (Tech) on
31.08.2009.

3. Appellant and the respondents have filed their respective
comments for the hearing of the second-appeal. Appellant has made
the point that the several replies, which CPIO has provided to the
appellant, are factually inaccurate. In her rejoinder, she has spelt-out
the list of incongruities in the replies she has received from the
respondents.

4. As it is necessary that in the light of appellant’s submissions, the
apparent incongruities in the replies provided to her by the CPIO are
examined for reconciliation and for a determination of whether the
replies furnished to the appellant were false and misleading, matter is
remitted to the Appellate Authority, Shri Gandhidoss, Additional
Commissioner (Tech), Central Excise, Chennai-I with a direction that he
will summon the parties for a hearing and having taken on board the
respective submissions, make a determination regarding whether the
replies furnished to the appellant by CPIO were factually inaccurate.
This exercise shall be completed within three weeks of the receipt of
this order. Appellant shall have the right to come up in second-appeal,
should she so wish, after she receives the Appellate Authority’s
decision.

AT-23032010-02.doc
Page 1 of 2

5. Commission’s Registry may send copies of appellant’s rejoinder
and the submissions of CPIO to the Appellate Authority for his
reference.

6. Appeal disposed of with these directions.

7. Copy of this direction be sent to the parties.

( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER

AT-23032010-02.doc
Page 2 of 2