Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No.CIC/WB/A/2009/001039SM
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 15 April 2011
Date of decision : 15 April 2011
Name of the Appellant : Shri Harbans Singh
S/o. Late Shri Nanak Singh,
124A/540, Block II,
Govind Nagar, Kanpur.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Prime Minister's Office,
South Block,
New Delhi.
The Appellant was present in person.
On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present:
(i) Smt. Sanjukta Ray, DS & CPIO,
(ii) Shri Sanjeev Gupta, SO & CAPIO,
(iii) Shri Subhendu Hota, SO & CAPIO
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra
2. Heard this case through videoconferencing. The Appellant was present
in the Kanpur studio of the NIC. The Respondent was present in our chamber.
We heard their submissions.
3. The Appellant had wanted to know by which date he would be provided
the compensation for having been affected by the antiSikh riots of 1984 as per
the new package announced by the PM. The CPIO had informed him that this
CIC/WB/A/2009/001039SM
information should be obtained from the Uttar Pradesh Government as the
PMO did not have any information in this regard.
4. During the hearing, the Appellant argued that since the Prime Minister
had announced the relief package for the antiSikh riots victims, the information
should have been provided by the CPIO of the PMO and he should not have
been advised to approach the Uttar Pradesh Government instead. On the other
hand, the Respondent argued that in terms of the said package, it was for the
State Government concerned to decide finally about the eligibility of grant of
relief and that the PMO had no role in the matter, nor did it have any
information in this regard having transferred his original representation to the
Uttar Pradesh Government in the past. Obviously, in this matter, there is no
information to be disclosed by the CPIO of the PMO. As evident from the copy
of the order shown to us, the Uttar Pradesh Government has already decided
the case of the Appellant and has rejected his claim for relief under the above
package.
5. If the Appellant has any case against the decision of the Uttar Pradesh
Government, he is better advised to approach a competent court of law or any
other authority having jurisdiction to decide on this matter. Under the right to
information, there is little that can be done to get him any relief under the said
package.
6. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
7. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra)
Chief Information Commissioner
CIC/WB/A/2009/001039SM
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.
(Vijay Bhalla)
Deputy Registrar
CIC/WB/A/2009/001039SM