Loading...

Mr. Amar Kumar Singh vs Press Council Of India on 12 November, 2009

Central Information Commission
Mr. Amar Kumar Singh vs Press Council Of India on 12 November, 2009
              Central Information Commission
                                                           CIC/AD/C/2009/000558
                                                         Dated 12th November, 2009

Name of the Applicant                 :   MR. AMAR KUMAR SINGH


Name of the Public Authority          :   PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

Background

1. The Applicant filed an RTI application dated 02.03.09 with the CPIO seeking
information about the outcome of his Complaint dated 20.11.07 regarding the
action taken for publication of two articles, the Complaint dated 05.05.08 against
the newspapers like Dainik Jagran, Prabhat Khabar and Hindustan for having
published objectionable materials regarding the character of the Applicant. Being
dissatisfied with the communication received from the CPIO, the Complainant filed
a First Appeal dated 12.05.09 reiterating his RTI request apart from leveling
various allegations against the Respondent of having provided incorrect &
incomplete information and having spared the delinquent newspapers etc. The
Appellant being dissatisfied with the response of the Respondent sought redressal
of his grievance before the CIC on 03.06.09. While reiterating the events leading
to the filing of the Complaint before CIC, the Complainant stated that he had
received communication dated 13.03.09, 18.03.09, 24.03.09 and 25.04.09 from
the Respondent but was not satisfied with the response.

2. The Commission while treating the Petition as a Complaint passed an order dated
25.09.09 directing the CPIO to provide information as sought by the Complainant
by 30th October 2009 and also issued a Show Cause notice upon the CPIO for non
supply of information within stipulated period of time as provided in the RTI Act
2005.

3. The Bench of Mrs. Annapurna Dixit, Information Commissioner scheduled the
hearing on 12th November, 2009.

4. Ms. Punam Sibbal, Under Secretary and Sh. Pradeep Bahl, Section Officer and
APIO represented the Public Authority.

5. The Complainant was not present during the hearing.

Decision

6. The submissions from the Respondent and also the documents including the
detailed point wise response dated 12.06.09 from the Appellate Authority indicate
that the Respondent has sought specific particulars from the Complainant on
various occasions as detailed hereinabove. The Complainant has been requested
to fulfill certain specifications in order to initiate Enquiry Proceedings as per the
Press Council [Procedure for Enquiry] Regulations, 1979. Instead of cooperating
with the Respondent, the Complainant has only made their job more difficult by
not supplying the required particulars. In so far information from the Respondent
is concerned, the RTI request of the Complainant has no meaning till the
Complainant acts in accordance with the stipulations of the law to help initiate the
enquiry process. The information sought by the Complainant is thus not available
on records because of contributory negligence of the Complainant himself. Hence
the Commission deems it fit to drop the penalty proceedings against the CPIO and
close this case.

(Annapurna Dixit)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:

(G. Subramanian)
Assistant Registrar

Cc:

Mr. . Amar Kumar Singh
PG, Department of English
SKM University
Dumra-8121101
Jharkhand

The PIO
Press Council of India
Soochana Bhavan
8 CGO Complex
Lodhi Road
New Delhi

The Appellate Authority
Press Council of India
Soochana Bhavan
8 CGO Complex
Lodhi Road
New Delhi

Officer in Charge NIC
Press E Group CIC

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information