CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Complaint No. - CIC/WB/C/2008/00158 dated 18.01.'08
Right to Information Act- Section 18(1) (b)
Complainant: Shri Govind H. Mali
Respondent: Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), New Delhi.
Decision Announced 17.8.'09
Facts
:-
The Commission has received a complaint from Shri Govind H. Mali of
Kalyan (W), Maharashtra that his request under RTI Act, 2005 seeking
information regarding action taken on his complaint dated 21.10.2005 filed with
Central Vigilance Commission, against C. M. Mehra, Commissioner of Central
Excise and other officials of Central Excise, Kalyan Division, Maharashtra, and
which was forwarded to Central Excise, Kalyan Division by CVC for necessary
action, submitted to the CPIO, Central Vigilance Commission, New Delhi, has not
been responded to, even though the same was duly submitted along with the
requisite fee dated 06.10.2007.
Having admitted the complaint of Shri Mudgal under Section 18(1) (b) of
RTI Act, 2005 the Commission issued notice on 04.07.2009 to the CPIO, Central
Vigilance Commission, New Delhi for furnishing comments on the complaint. In
response, CPIO Ms. Deepa Bajwa Director, CVC submitted her comments on
05.08.2009 with a copy endorsed to complainant Shri Govind H. Mali. The CPIO
has informed the Commission that the request dated 06.10.2007 was duly
responded to by the then CPIO & Director Shri K. L. Ahuja on 12.10.2007
addressed to the complainant. However, the same was returned with the remarks
of the Post Office on the envelop, “not known/ incomplete address/ returned to
sender.” The CPIO has attached copies of the envelop and the response sent to
Shri Mali with his comments.
1
Decision
It appears from the comments received from CPIO Ms Bajwa that the
request of Shri Govind H. Mali has been responded to well within the mandated
time. Hence, the allegation of not responding to the request by the CPIO does
not stand. Nevertheless, if complainant Shri Govind H. Mali did not receive a
response, he could have preferred first appeal, the channel available to the
complainant u/s 19(1) and not so far exhausted. In this case a copy of the
response sent to Shri Govind H. Mali is attached with this Decision Notice. If not
satisfied with the information now received, Shri Govind H. Mali might move an
appeal before the appellate authority & Addl. Secretary Shri V. Kannan, Central
Vigilance Commission, New Delhi. Shri V Kannan is advised to condone any
delay, since the issue was held up in Complaint u/s 18 (1) (b). If still not satisfied
with the information provided on his 1st appeal, complainant Shri Mali will then be
free to move a 2nd appeal before us as per section 19(3).The appeal is disposed
of accordingly.
Announced. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Wajahat Habibullah
(Chief Information Commissioner)
17.08.2009
Authenticated true copy, additional copies of order shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charge prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of
this Commission.
Pankaj K. P. Shreyaskar
Joint Registrar.
17.08.2009
2