In the Central Information Commission 
                                                      at
                                               New Delhi
                                                                              File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/000050
                                                                                     CIC/AD/A/2010/001818
Date  of Hearing :  February 8, 2011
Date of Decision :  February 8, 2011
Parties:
           Applicant
           Shri Satish Singraha
           Advocate
           1375, Rani Durgawati Ward
           Garha
           Jabalpur
           The Applicant was present during the hearing
           Respondents
           Prasar Bharati
           O/o Station Engineer
           Akashwani
           Sehdol
           Madhya Pradesh
           Represented by :  Shri A.K.Lakhera, PIO & Asst. Station Engineer
Information Commissioner             :   Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
                                               Decision Notice
The Commission directed the PIO to provide complete information 
                        In the Central Information Commission 
                                                              at
                                                      New Delhi
                                                                                             File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/000050
                                                                                                      CIC/AD/A/2010/001818
                                                           ORDER
Background
CIC/AD/A/2011/000050
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.3.4.10 with the PIO, AIR, Sahdol seeking the following
information:
i) Names of the comperers and from when they are compering the programme such as
Kisanvani, Yugvani and Bal Jagat
ii) Names of the officers who had done OB during the period Jan.08 to Dec.09 for the
programme Kisan Vani
iii) Details of vehicles hired for OB
On not receiving any reply, the Applicant filed an appeal dt.10.6.10 with the Appellate Authority
reiterating his request for the information. On not receiving any reply, he filed a second appeal
dt.5.10.10 before CIC.
CIC/AD/A/2010/001818
2. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt.9.6.10 with the PIO, AIR, Sahdol seeking information about
the budget allocation for the period 200607, 200708 and 200809, Medical allowance and Travelling
Allowance, transfer of staff, leave details etc. On not receiving any reply, he filed an appeal
dt.12.8.10 with the Appellate Authority reiterating his request for the information. On not receiving
any reply, he filed a second appeal dt.5.10.10 before CIC
Decision
3. The Commission on perusal of the documents on record directs the PIO to provide complete
information in both cases so as to reach the Appellant by 8.3.11.
4. The Commission also directs the PIO to show cause as to why a penalty of Rs.250/ per day
(Maximum Rs.25000) should not be levied on him for not responding to the RTI application within the
stipulated time as prescribed under the Act. He is directed to submit his written response to the
Commission by 15.3.11.
5. The appeal is disposed of with the above directions.
  (Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy 
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Shri Satish Singraha
Advocate
1375, Rani Durgawati Ward
Garha
Jabalpur
2. The Public Information Officer
Prasar Bharati
O/o Station Engineer
Akashwani
Sehdol
Madhya Pradesh
3. The Appellate Authority
Prasar Bharati
O/o Dy. Director General (CRII)
Akashwani
Madhya Pradesh
4. Officer Incharge, NIC