In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/000982
Date of Hearing : June 30, 2011
Date of Decision: June 30, 2011
Parties:
Applicant
Smt. Vimal Issar,
H.NO. D8, Defence colony,
New Delhi - 110024
The Applicant was present at the hearing.
Respondents
Prasar Bharti,
O/o the Deputy Director (A)
Doordarshan Bhavan, Coppernicus Marg,
New Delhi.
Represented by: Ms. E.S Isaac, Dy, D.G. & PIO,
Mr. Harpal Singh, SO (RTI)
Information Commissioner : Mrs. Annapurna Dixit
___________________________________________________________________
In the Central Information Commission
at
New Delhi
File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/000982
ORDER
Background
1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dt. 22122010 with the PIO, Prasar Bharti, New Delhi, stating
that she had submitted a representation to the DG Doordarshan on 20052010 containing all the
facts which favor telecast of her program ‘Disabilities leaping forward’ and that she had requested
the DG to review and to take a decision on the matter, for which she was given verbal assurance.
She stated that she had received a reply dt. 09072010 from DG Doordarshan informing her that her
case stands closed since the year 2007. In this connection she requested the PIO to ensure that her
representation dt. 20052010 is resumed and reviewed and a decision be given favoring the telecast
of her program. She also sought the photocopies of notings of the file vide which her representation
was handled. On not receiving any response from the PIO within the stipulated period the Applicant
filed her first appeal on 3.2.11. This was replied to by the PIO on 09022011 stating that
photocopies of the relevant portion of the notings have already been sent to the Applicant for her
ready reference while enclosing a copy of the acknowledgement of the receipt of the decision by the
Applicant. He further stated that the letter dt.09072010 was in reply to the Applicant’s
representation, and that the Applicant has already been informed that the matter has been reviewed
and that it was decided that the claim was not justified. Thereafter the matter has been closed since
the year 2007. Being aggrieved with this reply, the Appellant filed her 2nd appeal before the
Commission on 16032011.
Decision
2. During the hearing, the Appellant stated that some file notings till January 2010 have already been
provided to her by the PIO. However, she still requires file notings and other documents with respect
to the closure of the matter starting from Jan 2010 till the time the matter was closed. The
Respondent produced before the Commission the two files within which the information is available.
The Commission accordingly directed the PIO to allow the Appellant to inspect the files and be
provided with the information from Jan 2010 onwards till the matter is closed, although, this is
additional information and was not sought initially in the RTI application. This decision to provide the
additional information was taken in the light of the fact that the Respondents were carrying the
relevant files with them to the Commission which would make it easy for the Appellant to identify the
documents required by her immediately without having to wait for more days for them. The PIO was
also directed to provide copies of the documents identified by the Appellant to her (Appellant) within
one week from the date of inspection.
3. The case is accordingly disposed off.
(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy
(G.Subramanian)
Deputy Registrar
Cc:
1. Smt. Vimal Issar,
H.NO. D8, Defence colony,
New Delhi - 110024
2. The Public Information Officer
Prasar Bharti,
O/o the Deputy Director (Admn)
Doordarshan Bhavan, Coppernicus Marg,
New Delhi
3. The Appellate Authority
Prasar Bharti,
O/o the Deputy Director (Admn)
Doordarshan Bhavan, Coppernicus Marg,
New Delhi
4. Officer in charge, NIC