CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2008/00193
Dated, the 23rd July, 2008.
Appellant : Dr. Hari Dev Goyal
Respondents : Office of Registrar of Cooperative Societies
This matter came up for hearing on 14.07.2008 pursuant to Commission’s
hearing notice dated 05.06.2008. Appellant was present in person, while the
respondents were represented by Shri H.S. Meena, Assistant Registrar & CPIO.
2. As per the second-appeal petition of the appellant, he is aggrieved by what
he describes as “non-supply of the information sought from the Respondent vide
his application……… dated 09.07.2007.” According to the appellant, he had
asked certain questions regarding letters written to the Delhi Development
Authority by the respondents in respect of the members of the Cooperative
Society, viz. Rajnigandha CGHS Limited, who allegedly filed wrong / false
affidavits as members of the Cooperative Society. During his visit to the office
of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, appellant found that “not even a single
letter has been written to the Delhi Development Authority as part of the
Criminal Conspiracy by the officials of the RCS office and C.M. Mathew of
Rajnigandha CGHS Ltd….”.
3. Respondents’ position is that what the appellant has been asking for
amounts to creating for him information which is known to be non-existent.
What the appellant wants is the respondents’ explanation as to why the
above-mentioned correspondence was not established with the DDA by the
officers of the RCS. They have urged that they were not obliged to provide any
such explanation to the appellant. However, they were willing to allow the
appellant to inspect the records once again to see for himself if ever a
correspondence was established between the DDA and the RCS. That was the
best they could do in the matter.
Decision:
4. Considering the submissions made by both parties, the only viable option
in this appears to be to allow the appellant to inspect the records held by the
respondents to see for himself as to whether any such correspondence between
the DDA and the RCS was ever entered into.
Page 1 of 2
5. CPIO is directed to intimate to the appellant a date and time, within 2
weeks from the date of the receipt of this order, when the appellant can come and
inspect the records. Appellant shall be allowed to take such copies including
certified copies on payment of the fee and further-fee to be determined by the
respondents.
6. Appeal is disposed of with these directions.
7. Copy of this decision be sent to the parties.
Sd/-
( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
Authenticated by –
Sd/-
( D.C. SINGH )
Under Secretary & Asst. Registrar
Page 2 of 2