CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2009/000379 dated 26.3.2009
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19 (3)
Appellant: Shri Naveen Kumar Peer
Respondent: Prime Minister's Office (PMO)
Heard & Decision announced: 09.07.'10
FACTS
By an application of 27.11.2008 Shri Naveen Kumar Peer of Vikaspuri, New
Delhi applied to the CPIO, Prime Minister’s Office seeking the following
information:
“The ‘Status of action taken report, if any above with copy of noting
given on the file, if any’ on my above said letter addressed to
Hon’ble Prime Minister of India.”
To this, appellant Shri Naveen Kumar Peer received a response dated
10.12.2008 from CPIO Shri Amit Agrawal, Director, PMO informing him as
follows:
“Your letter dated 27.10.2008 was forwarded to the Secretary,
Railway Board vide this office’s I. D. No. 1/3/2008-PMP-1/1700497
dated 26.11.2008, for action as appropriate. No reply has been
received from the Railway Board. No noting has been made in this
case.”
Peeved at this response Shri Naveen Kumar Peer moved an appeal
before Ms. Vini Mahajan, Jt. Secretary, PMO on 27.12.2008 with the following
plea: –
“I had never suggested to direct my papers/ letters/ applications to
Secretary, Railway Board then why do I am being harassed for non
performance of your officers”
Subsequently, pleading that the copy of the order on first appeal was still
awaited, Shri Naveen Kumar Peer has moved his second appeal before us. In
reply to our appeal notice received on 10.4.2009, CPIO Shri Amit Agrawal has
submitted as follows: –
1
“The appellate authority disposed of the said first appeal vide her
order dated 29.1.2009 (copy enclosed).”
According to the order of appellate authority Ms. Vini Mahajan, Jt.
Secretary to PM of 29.1.2009, the appellate authority has in this case held as
follows: –
“I am of the view that the action taken by the CPIO of the Prime
Minister’s Office as above is in accordance with the prescribed
statutory provisions and he has appropriately dealt with your
application. It is pertinent to mention here that your appeal does
not challenge the reply provided by the CPIO, but only the manner
of disposal of the original letter.”
Subsequently in her response to our further notice specifying the date of
hearing CPIO Ms. Sanjukta Ray, Deputy Secretary, PMO has submitted as
follows: –
“3. In the instant second appeal filed by the appellant, he has
stated that he has not received the decision of the first
appellate authority. Copy of the same has been sent to the
Commission vide letter of even number 31.3.2009, with copy
endorsed to the appellant.
4. In view of the above statement made in the second appeal,
another copy of the appellate authority’s letter dated
29.1.2009 is enclosed herewith.”
The appeal was heard through video-conference on 9-7-2010. Only the
respondents are present in Prime Minister’s Office.
Respondents
Shri Amit Agrawal, Director, Appellate Authority
Ms. Sanjukta Ray, Dy. Secretary, CPIO
Although informed of the date of hearing through our letter of 2-6-2010,
which has brought the response of 24-6-2010 from PMO appellant Shri Naveen
Kumar Peer, has opted not to be present.
DECISION NOTICE
Since we have received no appeal against the order of 29.1.2009 of
Appellate Authority Ms. Vini Mahajan, and appellant Shri Naveen Kumar Peer
has opted not be present in the hearing in second appeal we must assume that
2
he is satisfied with the order received. The appeal itself, therefore, becomes
infructuous and is hereby dismissed.
Announced in the hearing. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to
the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner
9-7-2010
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.
(Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar)
Joint Registrar
9-7-2010
3