CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office),
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002640/10006
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002640
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Saxena
116-F, Pocket-I, Mayur Vihar
Phase-I, Delhi-110091.
Respondent : Mr. S. C. Tyagi
Public Information Officer & Dy. Secretary
Govt. of NCT of Delhi
Public Grievances Commission
M-Block, Vikas Bhawan, I.P.Estate,
New Delhi-110110.
RTI application filed on : 22/06/2010
PIO replied : 12/07/2010
First appeal filed on : 15/07/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 02/08/2010
Second Appeal received on : 21/09/2010
Sr Information sought Reply of PIO
.
1. Daily progress report of Appellant’s complaint. 1. Your grievance dated 22.6.2010 was forwarded
to ACP (Vigilance), Delhi Police on 30.4.2010 vide
letter no. F,P&C/2010/Annex-IJMigc/3345
2. Details of the officers to whom the complaint ACP (Vigilance), Delhi Police
was forwarded.
3. How long they hold the complaint & reason for Not pertain to this office
holding & details of actions taken by the
concerned officer during holding period of the
complaint?
4. What is the prescribed/fixed time limit to resolve There is no fixed time in this regard however every
an Issue/Complaint? effort is made to resolve the issue at the earliest
5. How long the Appellant had to wait for the Not applicable
action?
6. What will be your plan of action after ATR? Your case has been sent to the concerned
Department for direct disposal at their end. No
further action is required at our end.
7. Furnish the complete details of the Complaint. As above .1-6
Grounds for First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory response received from the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
“Prima facie the answers given by the Public Information Officer, Public Grievances Commission vide
letter dated 12.07.2010 are as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 and therefore, need no further
supplementary answers or any directions to the Public Information Officer, Public Grievances
Commission.”
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory response received from FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Sanjay Saxena;
Respondent: Mr. S. C. Tyagi, Public Information Officer & Dy. Secretary;
The appellant has been provided information by the PIO as per the records. The appellant believes
that the PGC should have dealt with his complaint in an effective manner. This is not the domain of RTI.
Decision:
The appeal is disposed.
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 cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Ac.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
03 November 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)(AK)