CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001433/13493
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001433
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Aditya Mitra
A- 212, RG Complex, Motia khan community
Centre, DB Gupta Road,
New Delhi- 110055
Respondent : Mrs. Jyoti Seth,
PIO & Registrar
Delhi State Commission,
A- Block, First Floor,
Vikas Bhawan, I P Estate,
New Delhi 110002
RTI application filed on : 20/02/2011
PIO replied on : 18/03/2011
First Appeal filed on : 10/04/2011
First Appellate Authority order of : 3/05/2011
Second Appeal received on : 27/05/2011
Sl. Information Sought Reply of PIO
1. How many complaints State Commission Two Complaints were received.
received against President, Shalimar Bagh
District Forum (North West District) in the last
six months?
2. From which source commission received these Through A.D. (CA) Fes
complaints (details)?
3. Have the State Commission in this period No, as the copy of complaints were forwarded
informed the complainant in the regard of these to the President (North- West) as well as to the
complaints (If yes then proof if no why)? applicant by the A.D. (CA)
4. On which dates these complaints have been put These were not put up by the President, State
up to the President State Commission (details of Commission
all the dates) ?
5. What is his remarks (photocopy of notesheet) ? These were not put up by the President, State
Commission
6. Is there any time frame fixed for the redressal of No.
these type of complaints (details) ?
7. If no action has been taken in these complaints, The A.D. (CA) already forwarded the copies of
what are the reasons for the same? the complaints to the President for necessary
action. A letter was also send to the President
DP for the action taken report
8. Which officer is responsible for the same? It is for the deptt to decide for any delay
Grounds for the First Appeal:
The applicant was not satisfied by the information as it was wrong and misleading.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The appeal was dismissed and the FAA observed that the allegation that the information provided by
the PIO is wrong and misleading is vague and the appeal deserves to be rejected
Ground of the Second Appeal:
The applicant was not satisfied by the information and the unfair disposal of First Appeal.
Relevant Facts
emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Aditya Mitra;
Respondent: Mrs. Jyoti Seth, PIO & Registrar;
The respondent has stated with respect to query-1 that only two complaints had been received
against President Shalimar Bagh District Forum in six months prior to RTI application. The Appellant
has produced a complaint against North West District Consumer Forum Shalimar Bagh dated
23/12/2010 sent by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission which is not on the file of the
Delhi State Commission. This was shown to the PIO who states that this complaint has not been
received by the Delhi State Commission.
The Commission is giving a copy of the December 23, 2010 complaint to the PIO. This should be
processed and the Appellant should be informed before 15 August 2011 about the action taken on it.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
Information available has been provided.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
16 July 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (AA)