Central Information Commission
CIC/AD/A/2009/001120
Dated 30 September, 2009
Name of the Applicant : Mr. Hukma Raj Badala
Name of the Public Authority : Department of Posts, Udaipur.
Background
1. The Applicant filed his RTI application on 11.06.09 with the CPIO, Department
of Posts, Udaipur stating that he suspects that is mobile phone is tapped by
the Department and that he had received a letter dated 20.04.09 , posted by
BSNL on 20.03.09 , after 40 days , after his conversation with the CIC was
tapped. He asked the CPIO to enquire as to under whose instructions his
staff is working. The CPIO replied on 09.07.09 providing some information
(not legible). Not satisfied with the reply from the CPIO the Applicant filed
his First appeal on 10.07.09 once again alleging that his phone was tapped
and complaining about a letter which was delivered late. Again on not
receiving any reply from the Appellate Authority the Applicant filed his Second
Appeal before the CIC on 22.07.09 reiterating his request and complaining
that the reply of the CPIO reflect a violation of the RTI Act.
2. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner, scheduled the
hearing on 30 September, 2009.
3. Mr. J K Hingorani, Inspector Posts and Mr. H S Goyal represented the Public
Authority.
4. The Applicant was not present during the hearing.
Decision
5. The Respondent submitted that the Appellant has complained several times
about receiving torn/delayed mail. The Commission observed, based on the
submission of the Respondent, that the earlier appeals of the Respondents
regarding delayed/torn mail received by him were disposed off by the CIC on
14.09.09 and 25.06.09 while suggesting to the Appellant that he approach an
appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance. In the instant case the
Appellant has complained once again that the letter has been delivered to him
after having been withheld by the post office for more than 40 days, after the
staff of the Department had overheard a conversation which he had with the
CIC regarding his pending appeals.
6. In this connection the Respondents brought to the notice of the CIC the
enquiries conducted in compliance with CIC’s Orders dated 21.12.08,
22.01.09 and 23.06.09 and pointed out that in all these case , it was found
that complaints by the Appellant regarding late delivery and delivery of torn
letters were found to be baseless. The enquiry reports, along with list of
prominent people in the locality who were contacted as part of the enquiry,
have already been furnished to the Appellant.
7. In these circumstances the Commission once again directs the Appellant to
approach an appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance.
8. The appeal is accordingly disposed off.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
(G. Subramanian)
Assistant Registrar
Cc:
1. Mr. Hukma Raj Badala,
#248, Gandhi Nagar – AMET,
PO. Char Bhuja Road,
Distt. – Rajasamand,
Rajasthan, 313332.
2. The CPIO
Department of Posts,
O/o the Sr. Supdt of Post Offices,
Udaipur Division,
Udaipur – 313001.
3. The Appellate Authority
Department of Posts,
O/o the Postmaster General,
Rajasthan Western Region,
Ajmer-305001.
4. Officer in charge, NIC
5. Press E Group, CIC