CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Complaint No. - CIC/WB/A/2009/000540 dated: 01.05.'09
Right to Information Act- Section 19
Appellant : Shri Praveen Rychmail
Respondent: Indian Tibetan Border Police (ITPB), New Delhi.
Decision announced: 21.6.2010
Facts
:-
By an application dated 15.01.2008 Shri Praveen Rychmail of Uttarakhand
sought information from the Central Public Information Officer, Indian Tibetan
Border Police, New Delhi regarding action taken with file noting, including daily
progress made on several applications filed by him with the Force on various
dates, together with copies of proof of receipt and dispatch of those applications
including information regarding names of officials responsible for not taking any
action on those applications and other related information. In response, CPIO
Shri Mukul Goel, Dy. Insp. Gen. ITBP, New Delhi by a letter dated 31.03.2008
refused the information by informing Shri Praveen Rychmail that the information
sought by the appellant did not fall under the categories of the information to be
provided by ITBP under Right to Information Act, 2005. Aggrieved with this
response, appellant Shri Praveen Rychmail moved an appeal u/s 19(1) of the Act
on 05.05.2008 before the appellate authority of the Force. Upon this, the
appellate authority Shri Pramod Asthana, Insp. Gen. ITBP, New Delhi in his order
dated 09.06.2008 upheld the stand of the CPIO.
Decision Notice
The Indian Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) is indeed an organization listed at
S. No. 11 in the Second Schedule of Right to Information Act, 2005 as dealing
with security and intelligence, and therefore not covered by the Act except for
information pertaining to allegations of corruption and violation of human rights.
The information sought by the appellant Shri Praveen Rychmail has made no
such allegations. And instead concerns action taken on several applications sent
1
by him to the Force which as stated by the CPIO in his response is in connection
with alleged anomalies in transferring of para-medical staff, for not considering
the post of pharmacist for appointment in Indian Missions and foreign services
etc and thus is general information related to administrative issues. Hence, in
light of Sec 24(1) this request does not lie within the ambit of the RTI Act. In light
of this the present appeal cannot be said to have substance under RTI and is
hereby dismissed.
Announced this twenty-first day of June 2010 in open chamber. Notice of
this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner)
21.06.2010
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.
(PK Shreyaskar)
Jt. Registrar
21.06.2010
2