Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No.CIC/WB/A/2010/000336SM
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 8 August 2011
Date of decision : 8 August 2011
Name of the Appellant : Shri Dipak Bhattacharyya
Chamber No. 233, Supreme Court Lawyer's
Chambers, New Delhi.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Central Vigilance Commission,
Satarkta Bhawan, GPO Complex,
Block A, INA, New Delhi - 110 023.
The Appellant was present along with Shri Tusar Mahapatra.
On behalf of the Respondent, Shri Keshav Rao, Director was present.
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra
2. Both the parties were present during the hearing. We heard their
submissions.
3. The Appellant had raised a number of queries and sought a number of
information regarding a representation he had made to the CVC pursuant to the
orders of the High Court dated 20 November 2002. The CPIO had informed him
that the said representation had been forwarded to the Ministry of Steel for
further necessary action and, as per the complaint handling policy of the CVC,
no report was required to be obtained in such cases. The first Appellate
Authority had endorsed the decision of the CPIO.
4. During the hearing, the Appellant submitted that the High Court had
given a categorical direction that the CVC would consider and decide the
CIC/WB/A/2010/000336SM
representation filed before it. Instead, the representation was merely forwarded
to the Ministry of Steel. He further submitted that he had not been given any
documentary evidence in support of the decision of the CVC to transfer the
representation; what had been given to him did not relate to his 2003
representation. The Respondent submitted that while he would try to find out if
the relevant records of the year 2003 were still available or not, it was possible
that the records might have been destroyed as per the policy of the CVC.
5. Whatever be the position in respect of the availability of these records,
we think that the CPIO must clarify in some greater detail the action taken by
the CVC on the representation which was filed in 2003 as stated in the RTI
application. Therefore, we direct the CPIO to provide to the Appellant within 10
working days of receiving this order, the photocopy of the relevant file noting in
which it was decided to forward the said representation to the Ministry of Steel
and, in case, the relevant records are no longer available, having been
destroyed, he shall clearly state so. In case the relevant records are no longer
available, he shall forward a copy of the relevant entry from the Complaints
Register to show that the representation had indeed been sent to the Ministry of
Steel. Besides, we also direct him to provide the Appellant with a copy of the
relevant complaint handling policy based on which the CVC had decided to
send the representation only for necessary action and had not deemed it
necessary to make further investigations into it.
6. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
7. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra)
Chief Information Commissioner
CIC/WB/A/2010/000336SM
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this
Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla)
Deputy Registrar
CIC/WB/A/2010/000336SM