CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room no.415, 4th Floor, Block IV,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi 110 066.
Tel : + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/WB/A/2008/00267/SG/00145
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2008/00267
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. V.P. Yadav
Superintendent,
GBSS School No.- 2
Sagar Pur, New Delhi.
Respondent 1 : Mr. Vinay Kumar,
Addl. District Magistrate (HQ) , PIO
Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
Revenue Department,
5, Sahmnath Marg,Delhi - 110054
RTI filed on : 06/06/2007
PIO replied : 30/08/2007
First appeal filed on : 24/08/2007
First Appellate Authority order : 31/10/2007
Second Appeal filed on : 24/01/2008
The appellant had stated in the RTI application that he was not paid a subsistence allowance
during his suspension period and sought the following information,
“1. Why I was not paid subsistence allowance during my suspension period w.e.f. 26/12/1995
regularly for five years as admissible under the rules?
2. Was any officer of Delhi Admn. Held responsible for this harassment, victimization and
agony caused to me and family? If not why not?”
The PIO rejected his application on 30/8/2007 on the grounds that what he had sought
was not ‘information’ as defined by the RTI Act. The First appellate authority also upheld
the contention of the PIO.
Decision:
Based on the papers provided by the appellant the Commission agrees with the PIO and the
First appellate authority that the appellant has not sought ‘information’ as defined under the
Act. In view of this, the appeal is unsustainable. However the Commission warns the PIO to
ensure that he must answer the RTI applications within 30 days.
The appeal is dismissed.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
5 November, 2008